Guarantor Debt

Alderbank

As above ^

The guarantor is usually jointly and severally liable, which means that in the event of non-payment the landlord can choose to chase the easiest one which is usually the unfortunate guarantor.

Flopfluppet

Thank you for your helpful replies. 
The tenant threatened my step son with a hammer, was clearly having an 'episode' after just being released from a secure mental health facility and he is taking a lot of drugs (something he has openly told SS.) Police have done nothing in spite of tenant also having children there and SS making multiple reports to them, they haven't even been to see tenant. This wasn't just picking up a hammer, SS was very nearly attacked, it was only his quick thinking that got him out of the situation.  SS caught it all on video via his phone.
So far the rent arrears (which began when tenant was in mental hosp) have not been paid but now the letting agent is threatening to pursue SS for it. SS will pay so he doesn't get a CCJ but this is why I've told him he must now find out what can be done.
It seems the letting agent is saying the LL won't evict the tenant because once SS pays arrears, he will have to make up the shortfall every month, so LL happy as she gets all her rent so won't then pursue eviction as there would be no need.
So to me that seems SS could have to pay those arrears every month for decades if that is what they decide to do. The LL could have started eviction months ago but didn't because she apparently decided she'd just get arrears from SS. 
You are all correct, you must be so careful to read what you sign and know what being a guarantor involves. Had SS told his sad and I what he was going to do we could have warned him against it. We've been through all the shock, telling him how foolish it is etc, he knows now, but it's too late. I think his motives were noble, to help someone out, but unwise.

robatwork

Flopfluppet said:

So far the rent arrears (which began when tenant was in mental hosp) have not been paid but now the letting agent is threatening to pursue SS for it. SS will pay so he doesn't get a CCJ but this is why I've told him he must now find out what can be done.

I think the overwhelming opinion of people here who have experience in this area is to NOT pay until your SS actually has court papers. The LL can threaten anything he likes, but that could all be hot air. Your SS will get court papers if he actually proceeds, and then have the chance to either pay or challenge the guarantee. 

It won't go from "Pay me or I'll sue you" to "I have a CCJ" without your SS having the chance to pay or defend himself. 

Flopfluppet

I have contacted a solicitor today who does deal with this type of case. They quoted £675 + vat, which amounts to 3 hours work, but didn't clarify if there are grounds to end the guarantorship (is that even the word!) I will call them on Monday. 
So on what basis could SS defend himself in court against this.
BTW SS has just told me the LL will not take the tenant to court and evict him because she says she doesn't agree with the fact he will be placed in a nice B&B then housed by the council, she says she doesn't want that to happen if she effectively makes him homeless.  So she has stated she'll just be happy to get the shortfall off SS indefinitely!

propertyrental

Flopfluppet said:

,,,,
So on what basis could SS defend himself in court against this.....................

If you read my (and others') earlier posts you'll seen the answer!

Grumpy_chap

Flopfluppet said:

SS will pay so he doesn't get a CCJ but this is why I've told him he must now find out what can be done.
It seems the letting agent is saying the LL won't evict the tenant because once SS pays arrears, he will have to make up the shortfall every month, so LL happy as she gets all her rent so won't then pursue eviction as there would be no need.
So to me that seems SS could have to pay those arrears every month for decades if that is what they decide to do. 

Yes, SS could end up paying the shortfall for ever.

As others have said, only if the Guarantor Agreement is correctly structured and enforceable.
The Solicitor that is being seen next week should be able to make that assessment within the fee indicated and then either inform SS he is trapped, or write to the LL to state why the SS should be released from the agreement.

Flopfluppet

Again, thank you SS is now going to see the solicitor and tell LL he will not pay. Just as an extra bit of info : apparently the agreement to be guarantor were emailed to SS and get signed online and sent them back. So nobody witnessed him sign. 
I did read online earlier that after the initial 12 months on the tenancy had ended it became a periodic tenancy and at that point the letting agent should have contacted SS to inform him that the terms of the tenancy was changing and it would have been at that point SS could have not agreed to continue to be guarantor.  But of course there was no contact. The article I read said this can and has been successfully tested in court. 
I hope I did clarify BTW that SS was threatened by the tenant and it is also the tenant doing the drugs. SS made a silly mistake being guarantor but he's not a violent maniac!!
Thank you all for taking the time to help, I do very much appreciate it. I will update once he sees the solicitor- I know often people don't and I'm sure it might be useful to someone else in the future.

secla

Going onto a periodic tenancy would not give the option to be removed as a guarantor. Theres no way apart from the tenant signing a new contract/eviction or the landlord agreeing to remove them (which no landlord would be silly enough to do)

Best advice before, wait till it go`s to court and state a case that the guarantor deed was not executed correctly which it seems it wasnt. To be honest the whole guarantor system is terrible and its why most people here recommend never to do it. If its done correctly theres no getting of the hook

_Penny_Dreadful

Flopfluppet said:

I did read online earlier that after the initial 12 months on the tenancy had ended it became a periodic tenancy and at that point the letting agent should have contacted SS to inform him that the terms of the tenancy was changing and it would have been at that point SS could have not agreed to continue to be guarantor.  But of course there was no contact. 

The whole point of a periodic tenancy is that things continue with the same terms as the fixed term tenancy once it ends. 

Why is SS wasting money on a solicitor? He should cancel the appointment and write to the landlord stating the guarantee was not executed as a deed and is therefore not enforceable. A first class stamp costs a lot less than the solicitor is going to charge for exactly the same thing. 

propertyrental

Dear Mr LL

I am writing to inform you that the guarantee agreement purported to exist supporting XYZ's tenancy at (address) is invalid.

The agreement was not Executed as a Deed. None of the relevant signitures were witnessed, and I was not provided with a copy of the associated tenancy agreement prior to being asked to sign.

Having taken advice, please be advised therefore that should any claim be made against me based on the purported guarantee agreement, I shall defend the claim, in court if necessary.

yours etc

Just a suggestion