Possession Proceedings Issued Without Notice

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by leaseholdanswers View Post

    As explained, £500 odd for costs is not a lot and the landlord is entitled to use solicitors to do this work.
    The costs demanded (including interest) appear to be about £1200
    I accept no legal responsibility for comments/advice I make on this forum. Please check with a solicitor before acting on statements made in a public forum.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by domtait View Post
      Thank you for the responses, she today paid the LH the outstanding rent in full, but not court fees or costs:

      1. The ground rent is £100 per year and are 4 years in arrears. the lease does state that they will add interest + admin fees for late payment. The interest also appears to be calculated correctly. The lease also states in a paragraph titled Sections 146 and 147 that the lessee has to pay all costs charges and expenses including legal fees incurred by the landlord.

      There is a section saying s196 of the law and property act will apply to any notice or demand. Looking at the act is concerning as it states:
      2)Any notice required or authorised by this Act to be served on a lessee or mortgagor shall be sufficient, although only addressed to the lessee or mortgagor by that designation, without his name, or generally to the persons interested, without any name, and notwithstanding that any person to be affected by the notice is absent, under disability, unborn, or unascertained.

      2. She has never informed the landlords agents of her home address directly (that i am aware of) although every other interested party appears to have the correct address. SHe has never used that address for anything.

      3. There is no letter before issue, the only correspondence we have seen or that have been exhibited are 4 invoices addressed to owner occupier and a final statement in the same name. no letters state that any legal action will be taken.

      4. They have used the correct form but have put owner/occupier rather than the name of the tenant. Does this make the notice invalid?

      5. When i spoke to the solicitors they said that they obtained the corrrect address from the land reg documents. THis siggests they only obtained the correct details when it came to issue the claim. When the solicitor looked at the file they should ahve known it was unlikely the notices had been sent to the correct address.

      We do not dispute that she owes the money, clearly she should have noticed nothing was being paid and chased it up. I do dispute her paying £1007 for the proceedings to be withdrawn when this could have been resolved without the need for legal proceedings. They certainly haven't followed the pre action protocols and have used the most severe legal proceedings as the first step rather than last. Surely a judge is unlikely to award £1007 costs plus their cost of attending a hearing?
      Alas not informing the FH of the correct address is a fatal mistake, many would say 'always pay the ground rent..even if not properally demanded' this stops scenarios like this and also protects you against the FH going down the forfeiture route for non-payment of service charges.

      As suggested perhaps pay up and then question the payability and/or reasonableness of the rest of the fees at an LVT.

      Andy
      Advice given is based on my experience representing myself as a leaseholder both in the County Court and at Leasehold Valuation Tribunals.

      I do not accept any liability to you in relation to the advice given.

      It is always recommended you seek further advice from a solicitor or legal expert.

      Always read your lease first, it is the legally binding contract between leaseholder and freeholder.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by siva View Post
        The costs demanded (including interest) appear to be about £1200
        That would put them in the exploitative rather than the remediatory

        A salutary lesson......

        I know I am being unsympathetic but this story is oh so familiar a tiny fraction of which are genuine oversights and more a mix of " hang it all"and "tough" to the landlord.

        Not only is it manna to those that exploit, but it really is no ones fault except their own, especially when they are genuine costs caused by the tenants act or omission.

        If its due then put it an ISA or deposit on a 3 month withdrawal you can get 2 to 5 %, so it might only be £20 but thats a pizza LOL
        Based on the information posted, I offer my thoughts.Any action you then take is your liability. While commending individual effort, there is no substitute for a thorough review of documents and facts by paid for professional advisers.

        Comment


        • #19
          I'm starting to have doubts about my argument for taking this to the LVT.

          The LVT can only consider variable administration charges which are payable. I've argued this before without much support but the way I see it, if the lease doesn't mention the charge then it is not payable as such (unless you agree to pay it). Also if the lease does mention it but specifies the amount or says how it is calculated then it is not classed as "variable". I don't think it is variable if they just say they want £1200.

          I'm thinking that options 1 & 2 (in my post above) are now less risk.

          One possible way to bring it into the LVT's jurisdiction if it is not mentioned in the lease in variable terms is, when paying in full, to say you agree to paying a charge but find the amount excessive. If they accept that payment then perhaps you have a payable variable administration charge.

          I don't think the interest charge is disputable if the formula for calculation is in the lease.

          Or perhaps you can rely on the s146 costs clause. Come to think of it Courts are usually restrictive against the Landlord when they try and recover general legal costs under that clause but it may be in the LVT's discretion to interpret that clause in your favour ...

          I'm looking at the case LHA posted and am wondering if the LVT have been rather generous in considering those costs. In paragraph 9 they refer to a covenant for recovering costs but it suspiciously is quoted as "in contemplation of any proceedings ......". I wonder if the lease then go's on to refer to s146/forfeiture proceedings which is the typical covenant in leases.
          I accept no legal responsibility for comments/advice I make on this forum. Please check with a solicitor before acting on statements made in a public forum.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by leaseholdanswers View Post
            I know I am being unsympathetic
            It must be annoying to have to wait for the arrears to go above £350 and then to have to chase offenders down. Then be restricted to costs only. People generally have better things to do.
            I accept no legal responsibility for comments/advice I make on this forum. Please check with a solicitor before acting on statements made in a public forum.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by siva View Post
              It must be annoying to have to wait for the arrears to go above £350 and then to have to chase offenders down. Then be restricted to costs only. People generally have better things to do.
              Well you can still get a money judgement for less than that.

              Yes in that the lease is the first place to start and restricting this to the recovery of arrears it is broadly under the lease or rely on the court to award costs.

              Bit the legal costs are variable, they are set at £1200 because the LL and their solicitor happen to charge that rate. Another might use a different rate. As in the Section 20 thread you are just using common sense and ordinary meaning and forgetting that L & T has it's own logic.
              Based on the information posted, I offer my thoughts.Any action you then take is your liability. While commending individual effort, there is no substitute for a thorough review of documents and facts by paid for professional advisers.

              Comment


              • #22
                Thank you all for your comments the advice is appreciated. I can see if from the LH's point of view, they have a tenant who hasn't paid the rent for many years, but still believe that the course of action £1007 is over the top. If I was to miss a months rent my LL would send debt collection agency within days, not ignore it until the arrears were big enough to evict me, different situation but the principle is the same.

                I contacted my local authority housing team and was able to speak to an officer who assists people in court with these sort of issues, although usually they are benefit claimants in social housing with different rules, rather than long leases such as this.

                Their opinion was that whilst the LH was within their rights to issue these proceedings, it's worth fighting on the grounds that she has paid the rent arrears (plus interest) and as they haven't complied with the pre action protocols, given the seriousness of issuing posession proceedings, that will not be looked upon favourably. They thought that its quite probable that if this proceeds to a hearing my mother will be ordered to pay the fixed costs under the CPR (somewhere in the region of £280?) but not the thousands which are being asked for.

                Is that reasonable advice or by continuing is she likely to end up paying far more than the £1k? I'd point out that she is a 64 year old disabled woman so this matter is causing significant stress, I don't want to make it worse by telling her to pursue a hopeless cause!

                Comment


                • #23
                  You say that they didn't comply, did they send a letter before action, well you don't know as they only had the property address.

                  Your post above is an argument that is refereed to building your house on sand- quickly washed away- they produce the copy LBA, which for all you know they printed that morning, and your argument is gone.

                  That she offered to pay rent when they tracked her down doesnt remove the liability for costs- dont trust the marblings of a council gerbil, who clearly doesnt have the complete facts, but someone who has for many years dealt with such cases - court appearances in the 100's.

                  As the address wasn't given, it is stacked against you and quite right to, how on earth was the landlord to find you and why should they, you have the ability to mitigate costs as explained and if you read the decision and like ones you can see how to.

                  Otherwise you are fooling yourself with an easy answer that fits the one you want. If you do, that feeling behind you, thats the teeth of their claim about to bite you in the bum
                  Based on the information posted, I offer my thoughts.Any action you then take is your liability. While commending individual effort, there is no substitute for a thorough review of documents and facts by paid for professional advisers.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by domtait View Post
                    My mother owns a leasehold on a flat which she lets out via an agency. On Thursday she received notice from court for a possession hearing for non payment of ground rent, interest and admin fees totaling £582. This was followed by a letter from a firm of solicitors stating that she must pay the £582 plus their costs of £1007 in order for the case to be withdrawn, however if not paid additional costs for instructing council to attend the hearing will be added.

                    THis was the first she heard about it. The claim form had 4 copy invoices exhibited all sent to the flat in question, at which she does not nor has ever resided, addressed to "owner/occupier". The letting agent hasn't ever received them nor have tenants ever forwarded one on so i assume they were binned (assuming they ever sent them). She pays the maintainance charges which are considerably more than the ground rent so in the absense of an invoice she never thought about rent.

                    I contacted the firm of solicitors to explain why she never received an invoice and said we would pay the £582 immediately so would they withdraw the claim once recieved, but was told its tough, it was her responsibility to inform the freeholder of her address and the case will only be withdrawn if she pays their costs too!

                    Please can someone advise if they are within their rights to have issued these proceedings? Had they ever contacted her at the correct address, which would have been easy to find if they had checked (its on the land reg docs etc) she would have paid immediately. Furthermore the solicitors obviously obtained the correct address when issuing the claim as her name and home address were on the claim form, yet no letters demanding payment were sent to the address prior to issuing the claim.

                    She is a disabled pensioner and this has caused her a lot of distress. It doesn't seem right that they can have issued these proceedings without ever having notified her then demand £1k to make it go away!
                    Am I missing something here?

                    1) Maintenance charges are paid - does this mean that these have been correctly addressed and, furthermore, is the landlord the same person as the managing agent? If so, they would have the address

                    2) You say that the land reg docs state the correct address. Has this always been the case and was this address specified on the completion docs?

                    Ta

                    Comment

                    Latest Activity

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X