Landlord fined for dumping father and son’s belongings on street and changing locks

MobileSaver

theartfullodger said:

Should have been sent to jail for this criminal offence.  Courts sadly almost always too lenient for such appalling landlords.  Landlords can and have gone to jail, plus bigger fines, for illegal evictions similar to this 

Of course, to balance things out, they should really bring back jail time for those who deliberately get into serious debt; such as those who continue to stay in a rental property with no intention of paying any further rent.

Similarly, council employees who encourage tenants to stay in a rental property with no intention of paying any further rent should also be prosecuted for conspiracy and face jail time.

Marvel1

Fine and compo should be higher IMO to act as more a deterrent. 

theartfullodger

..

Regardless, whether the arrears were £75, £750 or £7,500, the overwhelming response from the public is in support of the landlord's actions and I think, as @[Deleted User] suggested, people are fed up with those who think they can get away without paying their way.

Piffle.  £25 to an agreed housing charity if you have publicly available evidence supporting your assertion. Particularly is owing £75.

Do we take it you also believe anyone with a mortgage owing £75 should be immediately evicted without any court action, goods dumped on the queen's highway?  Bet you don't.

Suggesting that the British public support criminal acts is not , surely, temperate nor gentlemanly/ladylike.

Artful: Landlord.

Best wishes to all

Norman_Castle

[Deleted User] said:

Whilst i would not break the law in the manner of this landlord, I can see that many will regard his eviction in terms of good old british fair play and a matter of just deserts. Having a tenant live in the property and not pay rent. Id be better off getting robbed in the street.

There's no suggestion he was refusing to pay or that the arrears wouldn't have been paid. Arrears of £75 on a £500? monthly rent are nothing.
 

MobileSaver

theartfullodger said:

Regardless, whether the arrears were £75, £750 or £7,500, the overwhelming response from the public is in support of the landlord's actions

Piffle.  £25 to an agreed housing charity if you have publicly available evidence supporting your assertion.

The publicly available evidence of the "overwhelming response from the public" is in the comments sections of the numerous social media and news sites that have carried the story... I'll let you choose the housing charity for your donation.

theartfullodger said:

Do we take it you also believe anyone with a mortgage owing £75 should be immediately evicted without any court action, goods dumped on the queen's highway?  Bet you don't.

No, they shouldn't be evicted "immediately", is there any evidence that happened here?

theartfullodger said:

Suggesting that the British public support criminal acts is not , surely, temperate nor gentlemanly/ladylike.

As was suggested earlier, for many the British sense of fair play is stronger than blithely abiding by the law.

[Deleted User]

Norman_Castle said:

[Deleted User] said:

Whilst i would not break the law in the manner of this landlord, I can see that many will regard his eviction in terms of good old british fair play and a matter of just deserts. Having a tenant live in the property and not pay rent. Id be better off getting robbed in the street.

There's no suggestion he was refusing to pay or that the arrears wouldn't have been paid. Arrears of £75 on a £500? monthly rent are nothing.
 

The amount of arrears is of little consequence as even if 10k was owed the eviction was illegal. It isnt a matter of suggesting a refusal to pay, rather having already not done so. Legal notice under section 8 could be served.

steampowered

I am surprised the punishment was so light. Unlawful eviction is a criminal offence. Mind you at least he will have a fine for a criminal eviction on his record now.

Other landlords have been jailed in severe cases e.g. https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/nottingham-landlord-tried-evict-tenants-4818712.

theartfullodger

MobileSaver said:

The publicly available evidence of the "overwhelming response from the public" is in the comments sections of the numerous social media......

A wise person like yourself will be well aware social media reinforces and reflects what people (individually) look at: Not what reality is. 

Kindly supply links to the sites with evidence that you mention that you allege confirm that ####  the overwhelming response from the public is in support of the landlord's actions ##### for rent arrears of £75. 

MobileSaver

theartfullodger said:

MobileSaver said:

The publicly available evidence of the "overwhelming response from the public" is in the comments sections of the numerous social media......

A wise person like yourself will be well aware social media reinforces and reflects what people (individually) look at: Not what reality is. 
Kindly supply links to the sites with evidence that you mention that you allege confirm that the overwhelming response from the public is in support of the landlord's actions for rent arrears of £75. 

Ah, I see now, you're one of those... only evidence that supports your view is acceptable, anything that contradicts your view is the wrong sort of evidence.

It's interesting that you are also adding your own conjecture to the story and apparently treating it as fact; there is nothing in the verifiable court-reported original story that suggests the rent arrears were only £75 or that the tenant was 'immediately' evicted. In fact, ironically, both those titbits only appeared in the comments section of a social media site but according to you that means they are "not what reality is".

Anyway, here's some links to news sites and associated public opinion rather than social media:

Metro News

Daily Mail

Grumpy_chap

If this landlord had fallen foul of business law in a similar way, there would be a bar on the individual immediately trading as a Company Director.

Perhaps there needs to be some similar process that bans rogue landlords from being a landlord again.  Not sure how that would work in practice, but hopefully the idea can be understood.