Possession order dismissed due to advice of Evictions Specialist

ciderboy2009

GDB2222 said:

ciderboy2009 said:

GDB2222 said:

ciderboy2009 said:

bobbstar21 said:

 I have made a SAR to retrieve all documents but they have been very difficult and suspect they won't provide it.

Are you sure that a Subject Access Request would apply here?  Surely it's a Business to Business transaction?

The uncle and aunt are entitled to their data. Besides that, they are investors, and despite the rhetoric on this forum they are not in business. 

If they are landlords, and therefore receiving money for services provided, then they are in business whether they think they are or not.  My point about the SAR still therefore stands.

What services?

Seriously??

They are being paid to provide somewhere for someone to live. 

I would suggest that you take a look at how HMRC define a business.

GDB2222

Well, I accept that HMRC treats letting as a business for some purposes. But, not for pensions, for example. I don’t think that the HMRC view really applies to non tax matters, anyway. 

theartfullodger

GDB2222 said:

Well, I accept that HMRC treats letting as a business for some purposes. But, not for pensions, for example. I don’t think that the HMRC view really applies to non tax matters, anyway. 

HMRC will (err.. may ) decide if things really are non-tax matters or taxable. 

bobbstar21

I think we'll go for it.

It is our word against theirs. Let's say they say my uncle only said he has no deposit.

They have this advertisement on their website:

"We work closely with our clients to identify potential legal issues before they become problems. We offer strategic advice and solutions to help our clients achieve their real estate goals while minimizing legal-risk."

If a landlord says they have no deposit, I would be questioning that, especially in the case of my uncle who inherited the tenants. And especially in the case of a deposit which is a big cause of s21s being denied, I would want to know what actions they took to identify issues or why it did not raise any red flags for them. They are specialists - alarm bells should have been ringing.

The reality is they did no such thing. 

To further add, they have ignored most of my emails, and ignored my SAR request. Any court will see they have made no attempts to resolve this or cast away doubt.

eddddy

bobbstar21 said:

They have this advertisement on their website:

"We work closely with our clients to identify potential legal issues before they become problems. We offer strategic advice and solutions to help our clients achieve their real estate goals while minimizing legal-risk."

Just as a complete aside - and not really relevant to your question...

But the company you're talking about took that chunk of text from elsewhere. It's used on a number of American websites - hence the reference to "real estate" and "minimizing" with a "z".


I think it might be some 'example text' taken from a website that allows you to kind of 'build your own website in 5 minutes'.

GDB2222

I am not convinced that you can make a valid SAR on behalf of someone else? But, maybe, with the right authorisation.

The next stage on that is to involve the Information Commissioner, but I haven’t found them effective. 

bobbstar21

Wow, this thread got busy and I missed a lot of comments (didn't see them when I posted mine last night!).

Lots of things to comment on:

1. I should check if uncle has legal insurance
2. The SAR request - if there are issues with me requesting, they can tell me that. They have ignored the request. I do have a letter of authorisation.
3. Re the wording on the website - I believe it is relevant? If it's templated stuff, that's their problem - it's advertised on their website, we have instructed them on the basis of what it looks like they provide which is that. If they advertise the true nature of their services i.e. they do not communicate, we wouldn't instruct them in the first place.

I am a bit confused about the comments on whether they are allowed to provide the service and the referenced case

GDB2222

bobbstar21 said:

Wow, this thread got busy and I missed a lot of comments (didn't see them when I posted mine last night!).

Lots of things to comment on:

1. I should check if uncle has legal insurance
2. The SAR request - if there are issues with me requesting, they can tell me that. They have ignored the request. I do have a letter of authorisation.
3. Re the wording on the website - I believe it is relevant? If it's templated stuff, that's their problem - it's advertised on their website, we have instructed them on the basis of what it looks like they provide which is that. If they advertise the true nature of their services i.e. they do not communicate, we wouldn't instruct them in the first place.

I am a bit confused about the comments on whether they are allowed to provide the service and the referenced case

"I am a bit confused about the comments on whether they are allowed to provide the service and the referenced case"

There are are laws that effectively say that only solicitors and barristers can provide paid-for legal advice. It's not as broad as that, though, and there are parts of the job that a non-lawyer can do. 

Mrs Doble was a legal executive, and she went too far in what she did. This was despite following the guidance given to her by the governing body for legal execs. 

It's quite possible that your uncle's advisors likewise broke the law, but you'd need to do some studying to get to the bottom of that. If they acted criminally, it's quite likely that part or all of their invoice was unenforceable. 

bobbstar21

GDB2222 said:

bobbstar21 said:

Wow, this thread got busy and I missed a lot of comments (didn't see them when I posted mine last night!).

Lots of things to comment on:

1. I should check if uncle has legal insurance
2. The SAR request - if there are issues with me requesting, they can tell me that. They have ignored the request. I do have a letter of authorisation.
3. Re the wording on the website - I believe it is relevant? If it's templated stuff, that's their problem - it's advertised on their website, we have instructed them on the basis of what it looks like they provide which is that. If they advertise the true nature of their services i.e. they do not communicate, we wouldn't instruct them in the first place.

I am a bit confused about the comments on whether they are allowed to provide the service and the referenced case

"I am a bit confused about the comments on whether they are allowed to provide the service and the referenced case"

There are are laws that effectively say that only solicitors and barristers can provide paid-for legal advice. It's not as broad as that, though, and there are parts of the job that a non-lawyer can do. 

Mrs Doble was a legal executive, and she went too far in what she did. This was despite following the guidance given to her by the governing body for legal execs. 

It's quite possible that your uncle's advisors likewise broke the law, but you'd need to do some studying to get to the bottom of that. If they acted criminally, it's quite likely that part or all of their invoice was unenforceable. 

Wow.

What digging can I do? We made a SAR request to no avail. 

How do I know a non-solicitor can't submit a section 21, and an accelerated possession order?

RAS

Anyone can issue an S21. The vast majority are issued by LLs and EAs who have no legal training. Which is why so many fail. 

The question might be whether your specialist claimed to have professional training that they didn't actually have.

Meantime what you need is someone who actually has the expertise.