Advice regarding possession notice

WispyMisty

eddddy said:

WispyMisty said:

@eddddy when we dug a little deeper it seems that when the letting agent first acted for the LL he did have permission but over the years he remortgaged and didn't seek further permission. The agent didn't check with each tenancy, just the first.

OK.  So a very dodgy LL!

Remortgaging with a residential mortgage while they actually had a tenant present in the property - which sounds like mortgage fraud.

Out of interest - do you know if the lender is repossessing because they found out about the possible fraud, or is it because of payment arrears?

(Regarding the agent - if you want to push it, the letter(s) of consent probably had a time limit - like 12 or 24 months. I guess it depends when the most recent consent letter said consent was due to expire.)




Edit to add...

Just another thought... Have you seen any evidence that the LL remortgaged as the letting agent describes?

As opposed to the letting agent being 'creative with the facts' to avoid getting into trouble.

A very dodgy LL!! I've not seen the evidence, but it does fit with the other info we know, plus he actually 'sacked' the agents part way through the tenancy.
The repossession is due to arrears.
Depending what happens with this next stage pursuing the agents is something that we may consider 

GDB2222

RHemmings said:

GDB2222 said:

You need to apply to court for a money order that confirms how much should be paid to you.

This is sometimes called a small claim. It can take several months but could be much quicker. 

You can ask for a judgment by default if your landlord does not respond to your claim within 14 days of getting a copy from the court.

If you get a money order, send a copy to the scheme. The scheme then refunds your money.”

The protection is in the last sentence. It means that, if a county court decides in the tenant’s favour, they can just collect the money from TDS. That’s important because around half of county court judgments are never recovered, ie the claim never gets paid. 

That's very useful thanks. As collecting on the judgement is probably the most difficult part of the entire process. 

Even when the deposit is deposited with the protection scheme, neither the LL nor the tenant has to agree to the dispute resolution process. If they don't both agree, then it's up to the LL or tenant to take the case to court.

I have been a landlord since the 1980s, as there was a flat above my office that I let out. In all that time, I have never been to court about the deposit. 

silvercar

GDB2222 said:

RHemmings said:

GDB2222 said:

RHemmings said:

GDB2222 said:

I've only dealt with 'deposited deposits', but I assume that the insured schemes do indeed provide insurance to the tenant. Otherwise, the deposit would not be protected, and there'd have been an outcry by now. 

Then why does Shelter say that in the case of an insured deposit that the tenant has to sue an uncooperative landlord?

I really hope that the insurance does work and the tenant can get the money from the scheme if the landlord refuses to play ball. But, it certainly doesn't look that way from the little I've been able to find out. 

That’s worrying, I must admit. Do you have a link please? 

It's the link in my previous post. This one: https://england.shelter.org.uk/housing_advice/tenancy_deposits/how_to_get_your_deposit_back/if_your_landlord_does_not_respond

I did look around a bit more, and I couldn't find anything that contradicts this. Unfortunately I don't have the link, but I did find one site saying that if the landlord doesn't cooperate that the tenant then has to go through the courts. I'm still hoping that this is wrong. 

“Deposits protected in an insurance scheme

You need to apply to court for a money order that confirms how much should be paid to you.

This is sometimes called a small claim. It can take several months but could be much quicker. 

You can ask for a judgment by default if your landlord does not respond to your claim within 14 days of getting a copy from the court.

If you get a money order, send a copy to the scheme. The scheme then refunds your money.”

The protection is in the last sentence. It means that, if a county court decides in the tenant’s favour, they can just collect the money from TDS. That’s important because around half of county court judgments are never recovered, ie the claim never gets paid. 

Let’s assume OP goes to court and wins. Does the insurance scheme mean that OP gets paid out, or will the insurance scheme request the money from the overseas landlord? 

I’d put money aside rather than pay the rent, so you are not out of pocket, then tell the landlord to take the last month’s rent from the deposit. Far less hassle than going to court when the landlord is overseas and the property repossessed.