PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING
Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.Comet Newspaper reports - Landlord fined £8000
Options
cullet
Posts: 129 Forumite
Leslie Laird fitted new locks and completely emptied the flat – part of the property where he lives in Pirton Road, Holwell, near Hitchin – after tenant Lee Girdlestone challenged the terms of an eviction notice he received in November 2014.
The 73-year-old landlord pleaded not guilty to illegally evicting Mr Girdlestone under the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 – but was found guilty following a three-day trial at Cambridge Crown Court last week.
Judge Stuart Bridge ordered him to pay £3,000 compensation to Mr Girdlestone, 47, as well as a £5,000 contribution towards North Hertfordshire District Council’s prosecution costs – making a total bill of £8,000.
The case was brought against Mr Laird by the district council, which was making a prosecution of this sort for the first time.
The court heard that Mr Girdlestone, who entered an assured shorthold tenancy arrangement for the flat in January 2013, fell behind on the rent and was served with notice to vacate the property on November 10, 2014.
After seeking advice from the district council, he told Mr Laird that the notice was invalid as it did not give him the full legal period of time to vacate the flat.
Following a heated argument, Mr Girdlestone returned to the flat on November 26 that year to find the locks changed and his belongings removed, to be collected at a later date.
Mr Laird subsequently had this case brought against him by the district council.
Councillor Bernard Lovewell, who is responsibile for housing, said afterwards: “This is a landmark case for us, and we are pleased with the outcome.
“A private landlord must follow rules for a tenant to be lawfully evicted, which includes giving them a two-month notice period.
“It is a criminal offence to evict a tenant without following the legal steps, and we will seek to prosecute any landlord who illegally takes matters into their own hands.
“We hope this prosecution serves as a deterrent to other landlords.”
The 73-year-old landlord pleaded not guilty to illegally evicting Mr Girdlestone under the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 – but was found guilty following a three-day trial at Cambridge Crown Court last week.
Judge Stuart Bridge ordered him to pay £3,000 compensation to Mr Girdlestone, 47, as well as a £5,000 contribution towards North Hertfordshire District Council’s prosecution costs – making a total bill of £8,000.
The case was brought against Mr Laird by the district council, which was making a prosecution of this sort for the first time.
The court heard that Mr Girdlestone, who entered an assured shorthold tenancy arrangement for the flat in January 2013, fell behind on the rent and was served with notice to vacate the property on November 10, 2014.
After seeking advice from the district council, he told Mr Laird that the notice was invalid as it did not give him the full legal period of time to vacate the flat.
Following a heated argument, Mr Girdlestone returned to the flat on November 26 that year to find the locks changed and his belongings removed, to be collected at a later date.
Mr Laird subsequently had this case brought against him by the district council.
Councillor Bernard Lovewell, who is responsibile for housing, said afterwards: “This is a landmark case for us, and we are pleased with the outcome.
“A private landlord must follow rules for a tenant to be lawfully evicted, which includes giving them a two-month notice period.
“It is a criminal offence to evict a tenant without following the legal steps, and we will seek to prosecute any landlord who illegally takes matters into their own hands.
“We hope this prosecution serves as a deterrent to other landlords.”
0
Comments
-
Sounds like he would've got more via a civil route to be honest - but good on them0
-
both a nightmare tenant and slum land lord"It is prudent when shopping for something important, not to limit yourself to Pound land/Estate Agents"
G_M/ Bowlhead99 RIP0 -
Let this is be a lesson to landlords, if the tenent messes up you still have to follow rules.0
-
Considering all the costs involved in a proper eviction and the costs they can run up to 8k seems quite cheap to remove a nightmare tenant really0
-
-
Average is 500 quid ? Yer after about 6 months to a year of the tenant paying Naf all rent and potentially ruining the place.
For a lot of landlords it's probably cheaper to do an illegal eviction0 -
OP does not give a link to the article but I suspect the LL in this case did not get his rent back either. As it was a criminal court, he would not have been able to counter-claim but would have had to claim it by a seperate, civil, action.
I meant that I assume after illegally evicting the tenant he probably rented the flat out to a paying tenant.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.8K Spending & Discounts
- 235.5K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.2K Life & Family
- 248.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards