Current possession case adjourned - Courts not hearing current applications.

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

    Current possession case adjourned - Courts not hearing current applications.

    Dear Forum,

    Just been informed the following for 2 hearings that I was due to have this week......

    Due to the recent outbreak of COVID-19 we are adjourning the above possession cases, which were due to be heard on 25 March 2020 for a date to be fixed.

    Not sure how long this will be, but if you cant do any new applications for 3 months, I've waited over 2 months to get this hearing, so its likely with the back log thats going to build up, that it could be 5+ months for new applications for evictions, if the Courts decide to hear cases.

    Whilst I would always do what I can to help tenants, I'm left in a situation where non paying, drug dealing tenants, can continue to cause misery for all others they live with.

    Stay Safe

    #2
    Were these S21 or S8 cases? Dreadful situation.



    Freedom at the point of zero............

    Comment


      #3
      I would fill out another application in preparation when the courts resume (in case you require it), but I would image you would be the first once the courts resume, rather than to start a new application or the 3 months have expired.

      I would also recommend you follow through with a CCJ if you don't receive any payment so that you could in the future (within 6 years) enforce the order.

      Comment


        #4
        The current draft (if what's being circulated online is an actual draft not a fake or just one idea) doesn't ban possession hearings for three months.

        In the version I've seen, the two month minimum notice period is changed to three months, so notice can still be served, but it would have to expire after three months not two.

        However, I haven't seen anything about what happens to current notices, which may simply become invalid.
        When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
        Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

        Comment


          #5
          I think I would pay a visit to the local Police and insist they do something as you cant now evict them and its potentially unsafe with everyone else having to be at home.

          Comment


            #6
            Unfortunately governments around the world are listening very selectively to the scientific advice they are receiving. They are not listening to advice from highly respected epidemiologists that the mortality mortality from this virus is likely to prove very low (overall population life expectancy is likely to be completely unchanged due to the virus itself) and that the number of deaths caused by the response will vastly exceed the numbers caused by the virus - despair, suicide, homicide and destroyed lives.

            https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/temp...i.13222#page=1

            Unfortunately that is the story history is going to tell

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by AndrewDod View Post
              the number of deaths caused by the response will vastly exceed the numbers caused by the virus - despair, suicide, homicide and destroyed lives.

              https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/temp...i.13222#page=1
              I don't see despair, suicide, homicide and destroyed lives mentioned in that link.

              Comment


                #8
                Where is the additional volume of "despair, suicide, homicide and destroyed lives" going to come from?
                When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
                Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
                  Where is the additional volume of "despair, suicide, homicide and destroyed lives" going to come from?
                  Discussed in detail in the various economic and social analyses of likely outcomes. However by way of example, the 2008 monetary crisis (which affected relatively few people) as associated with 20,000 excess suicides internationally. This current situation might be 100 times that over a decade. Folk who lose small businesses they have spent the past 5 years trying to grow, tend to kill themselves sadly. Poverty in general kills people too at a very fast rate.

                  Probably many landlords will die too.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    OK, that makes sense, but the economic crisis is caused by the pandemic, not the response to it.

                    While it's true that it's possible that overall mortality rates will be broadly the same as usual, a significant cause of that is that we're all washing our hands more and most of us are at home.

                    You can't do nothing because, while a lot of the people who are dying would probably have died soon anyway, lots of them wouldn't have done. Even if you decided not to intervene in victims who were 80 or more, there would still need to be a broadly similar response.

                    And that's predicated on a model where the number of deaths is broadly in line with the normal hard winter range.
                    If the outbreak really breaks loose in India or the US, that model's shot, because this will be the first of several waves of disease.

                    I'm not totally sure that life expectancy is a critical measure of anything in itself.
                    I'd expect it to increase slightly (because a significant number of people slightly older than average will die in numbers - so they'll affect the average this year rather than next year or the year after), which will then decrease slightly as the missing deaths skew the average in those years.
                    When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
                    Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
                      OK, that makes sense, but the economic crisis is caused by the pandemic, not the response to it.
                      No it is not. It is caused entirely by the response, and the consequences of the response have to be factored into any models of the scenario.

                      To take an extreme position (which I am not suggesting we do take) - if it was not possible to sequence viruses (let us say this pandemic had taken place 20 years ago), we would not in fact know there was a pandemic at all, or only very astute epidemiologists would know, and hospitals might have been a bit crowded. It would have appeared much like a slightly worse version of seasonal flu (which kills hundreds of thousands of people every year without anyone batting an eyelid). Perhaps a few extra hundreds of thousands would have died over a year, but given their age distribution, the economic impact would have been negligible, even perhaps positive for most young people.

                      The bigger problem is that the response is not likely to prevent deaths at all (assuming everyone will eventually get infected) - it will just delay them. So the entire response relies on development of an effective and SAFE vaccine during the delay. A further problem is that it is not simply a case of saving lives - it is a case of shifting deaths and detriment from one group of people to another. Flattening the curve will not prevent deaths if the mortality rate is as high as they say it might be because it would require flattening to be very very flat (over 10 years) to prevent hospital flooding.

                      But the big fly in the ointment is that all the evidence says that the mortality rate is not high (perhaps 0.5% as opposed to the WHO initial estimate of 3%) and almost all - 99% - of that 0.5% is in people over age 75 and mostly over age 85. In Italy only 35 deaths have been in people under 50, and most of those either had serious underlying illnesses or were heath care workers. The best experiment as to the death rate was the Diamond Princess - where 1% of INFECTED people with a mean age of 75 died over about 6 weeks (the death rate over 6 weeks in 75 year old people is 0.8% anyway).

                      * Nearly a million people die of Malaria in Africa every year - and nobody cares.
                      * More than a million people die of TB in Africa every year - and nobody cares either.

                      This whole crisis is more a case of a first world crisis of perspective than anything else. Many will die and suffer, but it is preventable suffering that matters, and if the world really cared about that they would
                      a) Have dealt with * above
                      b) Be shipping tons of food to Africa NOW to prevent pandemic deaths.

                      The estimate is that each life saved by the current measures will cost at least 10 million Euros of public money. That ten million will save thousands by using it elsewhere (like the above).

                      Having said all of the above I am self isolating because I am personally in a very high risk category - reasonably old and also immuno-suppressed.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        This (from the Spectator) is a fairly readable lay account of some aspects of what the epidemiologists are discussing:

                        https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...ar-as-we-think

                        I fear I have given rather too much away as to my professional background, but the facts are everything here.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          By the way, for anyone following the actual science here, the rather useless Imperial College Epidemiology Unit who originally published the headline modelling reports saying that 500,000 people would likely die in the UK from this virus, have now admitted that it is a LOT less deadly than their fanciful assumptions (which they were told from the start were false) - and have revised the estimate down to 20,000 (far less than annual usual flu deaths). Largely on the basis of Imperial College reports, many Western economies have already been tanked, and many jobs, careers and businesses destroyed.

                          At the moment most of the discussion of this fiasco is taking place on twitter

                          https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/sta...33211011690499

                          https://www.newscientist.com/article...pert-predicts/

                          No doubt the red faced people will try to claim victory as a result of their heroic actions.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            The courts have just been ordered (by a practice direction) to stay all evictions for 90 days.
                            When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
                            Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

                            Comment

                            Latest Activity

                            Collapse

                            Working...
                            X