Lodger lied during application, outcome on page 29...!

themastergoose

canaldumidi said:

So 2. (c) (ii) says  a minimum of 6 months.

12 (c) says may be ended by either party ... for any reason.

So that makes no sense!

7. is interesting: when did buildings insurance become required by law? I must have missed that!

12 (a) & (b) also interesting: how does 'becomes void' differ from 'immediate termination'?

The "end for any reason" clause with notice would only apply after that minimum term from either side had lapsed, assuming nothing was done that would have broken the agreement as he'd done in this case. Could also be used if it was agreed the lodger wanted to leave early and it was all mutual.

Mortgage lender requires building insurance, but it's irrelevant for the matter at hand.

Someone's who's behind on rent wouldn't necessarily face termination and immediate eviction. Depending on the circumstances for the late rent, the agreement would be voided and a replacement with differing terms issued.

Immediate termination would be reserved for serious matters, hence late rent is separate from other issues.

themastergoose

I'm replying to the LBA roughly along the lines of what @saajan_12 and @TBagpuss have said.

GDB2222

themastergoose said:

I'm replying to the LBA roughly along the lines of what @saajan_12 and @TBagpuss have said.

That's sensible. Well done, but you really took some persuading.

GDB2222

themastergoose said:

Had to remove some personal info, but here's what he signed:

I've looked at that twice, but I've missed the paragraph which says you can terminate the agreement because of a bad CRB/DBS check.  Am I just word blind?  Or, is there another agreement that covers that?

emmajones1976

GDB2222 said:

themastergoose said:

Had to remove some personal info, but here's what he signed:

I've looked at that twice, but I've missed the paragraph which says you can terminate the agreement because of a bad CRB/DBS check.  Am I just word blind?  Or, is there another agreement that covers that?

12b covers that doesnt it?

themastergoose

emmajones1976 said:

GDB2222 said:

themastergoose said:

Had to remove some personal info, but here's what he signed:

I've looked at that twice, but I've missed the paragraph which says you can terminate the agreement because of a bad CRB/DBS check.  Am I just word blind?  Or, is there another agreement that covers that?

12b covers that doesnt it?

You beat me to it...!

GDB2222

Thanks for that. My eyes glazed over by clause 12.

Presumably, there's some other document where the unspent convictions have failed to be disclosed? This document explains clearly, in language a layman can understand, that the lodger agreement will terminate without notice if unspent convictions were not disclosed. 

It's strange that that absolutely vital document wasn't posted.

It does exist, doesn't it? Otherwise, how would clause 12b apply?  




Although @themastergoose is clearly a private individual, he is offering this room on a commercial basis to a 'consumer'. There's a raft of consumer protection legislation, and the OP needs to show that Clause 12b was clearly explained at an early stage to the lodger, and explained in simple language.

The fact that my (really quite experienced, if rather aged) eyes missed clause 12b really does mean that the court could find that it falls foul of Part 2 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015. 

In addition, the clause specifies that the agreement may terminate without notice. The court could easily find that eviction without notice is an unfair term. 


 

GDB2222

I originally thought the lodger had no chance of success. The more the OP posts, the better I think the lodger's chances are. 

CKhalvashi

themastergoose said:

Had to remove some personal info, but here's what he signed:

I'm not picking on you here, merely pointing out my interpretation of the legislation which a judge could take if they wish, assuming this does make it to court.

As rent is payable weekly under Section 3A, was a rent book provided? This would be a legal requirement under Section 4(1) Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. This could, in the modern world, be something as simple as a 3 line spreadsheet (date, payment, date recrived) on something like Google Docs (or a printed copy), so doesn't need to be a physical rent book. Failure to provide this is a criminal offence.

Section 12B of the agreement strictly wouldn't give a right to complete the checks required as a result of OP's work, however a Basic disclosure may be ok in this event under the contract wording. This should have also taken into account that some of the convictions would never become spent, however the full circumstances surrounding these convictions given section 2C(2) had already come into effect should possibly have been given more consideration. I'm not going too far into the work element of this as enough information has been given to cover this, but this possibly could have been more clear with something along the lines of 'Due to the employment of the landlord, a full DBS disclosure will be required'.

In addition, I wasn't there so can't judge his behaviour, but additionally neither was the judge, however if there was nothing to suggest there may be further criminal offences, a judge could take a dim view of section 12B and the circumstances around which this was effectively used. It's also possible it could be deemed an unfair term and removed from the agreement entirely, however I'm not sure what the chance of this happening may or may not be.

In any event it may be considered that the word 'immediately' may constitute an unfair term due to a legal right to 'reasonable notice', although note there is no definition of reasonable notice in law.

In short, I consider 12B to be unclear given the circumstances, to not state what may be required and to potentially be unfair on that basis.

I do note that to mitigate this a full refund of unused nights and deposit (from memory) has been given though, and will give OP credit for this.

themastergoose

GDB2222 said:

Thanks for that. My eyes glazed over by clause 12.

Presumably, there's some other document where the unspent convictions have failed to be disclosed? This document explains clearly, in language a layman can understand, that the lodger agreement will terminate without notice if unspent convictions were not disclosed. 

It's strange that that absolutely vital document wasn't posted.

It does exist, doesn't it? Otherwise, how would clause 12b apply?  




Although @themastergoose is clearly a private individual, he is offering this room on a commercial basis to a 'consumer'. There's a raft of consumer protection legislation, and the OP needs to show that Clause 12b was clearly explained at an early stage to the lodger, and explained in simple language.

The fact that my (really quite experienced, if rather aged) eyes missed clause 12b really does mean that the court could find that it falls foul of Part 2 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015. 

In addition, the clause, as written specifies that the agreement may terminate without notice. The court could easily find that eviction without notice is an unfair term. 


 

I can’t upload his disclosure or the response that come back to a public forum. You’ve actually asked for a 3rd time for it, but my answer remains the same.

I’ll remind you again, he lied to secure the property. I’ll be amused if a judge sided with someone who deliberately lied and shows dishonesty.