N244 Application Notice Q10 Evidence

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

    #31
    Aps,

    I can't state this strongly enough; you should pay the CCJ.

    It will prevent her getting a loan, credit card, a car, a mortgage, store cards, future rental properties, among other things.

    Bailiffs will enforce at multiple properties and make efforts to track your daughter down if she's not present at the ones listed. If it's escalated to high court they can also seize assets such as cars, laptops, jewellery, etc

    Comment


      #32
      Thank you so much for the advice.

      Comment


        #33
        Sorry to trouble again.

        Who decides the amount each tenant pays in a joint and several tenancy?

        Comment


          #34
          Originally posted by pinede12 View Post
          Who decides the amount each tenant pays in a joint and several tenancy?
          The tenants.

          Each of them is responsible for the full amount of the rent, but they usually discharge that liability by paying the full rent between them.
          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


            #35
            How can the claimant go to the court and demand an amount if there is no agreed amount in the first place?

            Comment


              #36
              Presumably you agreed what you were each going to pay when the arrangement was originally made.

              Anyway, the case has been decided, so the judge has made a ruling based in the evidence given to them.
              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


                #37
                As the Claimant has invented her own figures for the rent, which had never been agreed since the landlord actually reduced the rent by the defendent's amount to relieve her of paying after losing her job. The share of the new rent was never agreed upon. We understand the judge has decided purely on the Claimants decision of rent amount as nothing had been agreed. And we understand he defendent (my daughter) is now obliged to pay her. However, is there anything to stop the defendent suing the Claimant for stating she is owed an amount that had never been agreed upon? there were 3 tenants, with different sized rooms, and previously paid different amounts before the landlord kindly reduced the rent by the defendents part. The Claimant clearly abusing his goodwill.

                Comment


                  #38
                  It's academic.
                  The case has been tried and judgement probably can't be set aside and an appeal is virtually impossible.

                  You can't sue the tenant for money already awarded to them by a court.
                  That would simply be an abuse of process (that could go on forever).
                  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


                    #39
                    Originally posted by hybrice View Post

                    This will cost you a fortune, you'd need to get the court of appeals to set aside, which the claimant can defend, if you lose - you'd be slapped with costs (could be several thousand). If you're successful and they set it aside, that isn't the end - it goes back to trial and you could still lose, and be slapped with costs. And your case is shaky at best. Pay up and move on, in my opinion.
                    I believe an appeal at this stage would go before a circuit judge. But either way unlikely to succeed unless an error in law. The standard one is failing to properly consider and attach weight to evidence.

                    Best to make an offer of £5 per month if unwaged.

                    Comment


                      #40
                      Tell me, was the claimant's last known address the grandmother's or the property where she had a tenancy? Because clearly if the latter she should have been served there. I'm not sure that helps but I'll have a look.

                      Comment


                        #41


                        Service of the claim form where the defendant does not give an address at which the defendant may be served

                        6.9

                        (1) This rule applies where –

                        (a) rule 6.5(1) (personal service);

                        (b) rule 6.7 (service of claim form on solicitor or European Lawyer); and

                        (c) rule 6.8 (defendant gives address at which the defendant may be served),
                        do not apply and the claimant does not wish to effect personal service under rule 6.5(2).

                        (2) Subject to paragraphs (3) to (6), the claim form must be served on the defendant at the place shown in the following table.

                        (For service out of the jurisdiction see rules 6.40 to 6.47.)
                        1. Individual Usual or last known residence.
                        2. Individual being sued in the name of a business Usual or last known residence of the individual; or
                        principal or last known place of business.
                        3. Individual being sued in the business name of a partnership Usual or last known residence of the individual; or
                        principal or last known place of business of the partnership.
                        4. Limited liability partnership Principal office of the partnership; or
                        any place of business of the partnership within the jurisdiction which has a real connection with the claim.
                        5. Corporation (other than a company) incorporated in England and Wales Principal office of the corporation; or
                        any place within the jurisdiction where the corporation carries on its activities and which has a real connection with the claim.
                        6. Company registered in England and Wales Principal office of the company; or
                        any place of business of the company within the jurisdiction which has a real connection with the claim.
                        7. Any other company or corporation Any place within the jurisdiction where the corporation carries on its activities; or
                        any place of business of the company within the jurisdiction.
                        (3) Where a claimant has reason to believe that the address of the defendant referred to in entries 1, 2 or 3 in the table in paragraph (2) is an address at which the defendant no longer resides or carries on business, the claimant must take reasonable steps to ascertain the address of the defendant’s current residence or place of business (‘current address’).

                        (4) Where, having taken the reasonable steps required by paragraph (3), the claimant –

                        (a) ascertains the defendant’s current address, the claim form must be served at that address; or

                        (b) is unable to ascertain the defendant’s current address, the claimant must consider whether there is –

                        (i) an alternative place where; or

                        (ii) an alternative method by which,
                        service may be effected.

                        I would be interested to hear what reason the DJ gave for refusing the application. Because it's an equitable remedy did the DJ ask whether an alternative method of service was considered? Why was d not served at their last known address? Would that have made any difference?

                        In order to be successful in a discretionary set aside application the d needs to show they have a real prospect of success, and apply in a timely manner, and from what has been said they didn't.

                        It is only mandatory for the application to be successful if the rules for service were not followed.

                        So here we have a judge making the decision probably because on what the defendant said here there was no real prospect of success. Unfortunately this is an example of where employing a direct access barrister for £200 would have been very worthwhile, even for a telephone hearing, because imo it had real prospects of success due to the d relying on a promise and from what has been said the other tenants had no losses.

                        Anyway best to immediately satisfy the ccj to show settled as it will help in the poor credit rating they will have.


                        Comment


                          #42
                          Thank you for your reply. I shall answer your questions below.
                          "the claimant must take reasonable steps to ascertain the address of the defendant’s current residence (‘current address’)"
                          I believe the Claimant did not do this. She assumed the defendent was living at the last known address.

                          I would be interested to hear what reason the DJ gave for refusing the application.
                          He said the grandmother's Alzhiemers was an excuse and that if she was capable of returning the letter from the court to sender, she could have informed the defendant about the letter. Which is certainly not the case. She has no idea what she is doing most of the time. Sometimes she is reasonable and other times not. The defendant has not visited her grandmother in a long time, besides, unable to do so because of Covid.

                          Because it's an equitable remedy did the DJ ask whether an alternative method of service was considered?
                          I don't think so. He immediately dismissed the case to set aside.

                          Why was d not served at their last known address? Would that have made any difference?
                          She was served at the last known address which was her grandmothers. However she was not living there after moving out of the room in question. She lived temporarily at an Air BnB a 3 hour drive away close to her new employment.

                          The judge has never given the defendent the chance to defend herself. She had a strong case which is why she paid the 255 pounds to attempt to set it aside.

                          Comment

                          Latest Activity

                          Collapse

                          • Evacuation of Tenant
                            by berrahri
                            There was a landslide and my Tenant had to be evacuated. They cannot return because access to the property is not safe.
                            They had been reasonably okay Tenants, but as soon as this event occured they have treated me like the enemy! Everything I have advised appears to have been treated with suspicion...
                            19-04-2021, 00:23 AM
                          • Reply to DPS dispute resolution service
                            by Chester Perry
                            £900 deposit and the Letting Agent requested the whole deposit as the cleaning and redecorating to fix non wear & tear damage was estimated at approx £4000 and also they stole / took 2 x fridge freezers. Independent inventory on moving in and moving out backed all this yet the TDS awarded £700!...
                            18-04-2021, 21:14 PM
                          • DPS dispute resolution service
                            by Thomasdiets123
                            What's everyone's experiences with the DPS dispute service. Did you get what you claimed? Did you have good evidence to back it up?
                            Thank you....
                            12-04-2021, 16:37 PM
                          • Reply to Rent arrears
                            by Bixwier
                            Have any evictions ever gone ahead since cv19?

                            how long is the backlog now? Are bailiffs actually working?

                            what happens if tenants say they have symptoms and are shielding?
                            18-04-2021, 18:09 PM
                          • Rent arrears
                            by MP31
                            Hi

                            So I have a tenant who has build up large rent arrears and I have gone through the process with the solicitor of S8 for rent arrears and I have a court date In April. The tenant left the house last Monday and informed me they had left.
                            To me it seems unlikely I will ever get...
                            21-02-2021, 07:43 AM
                          • Reply to Notice Period to Tenants
                            by Bixwier
                            Have any evictions ever gone ahead since cv19?

                            how long is the backlog now? Are bailiffs actually working?

                            what happens if tenants say they have symptoms and are shielding?
                            18-04-2021, 18:03 PM
                          • Notice Period to Tenants
                            by annam222
                            Hi all,
                            I rent out my flat using an estate agents let & collect service. It is rented out using an assured shorthold tenancy agreement of 12 months (no break clause). The 12 months ends in August this year. I have just been told by the estate agents that "due to Covid the law has changed...
                            01-03-2021, 14:54 PM
                          • Reply to County court bailiffs
                            by Bixwier
                            Have any evictions ever gone ahead since cv19?
                            18-04-2021, 18:01 PM
                          • County court bailiffs
                            by Perce
                            Hello All

                            What county court bailiffs do if they come to evict and the tenants say they are not feeling well?...
                            24-02-2021, 13:42 PM
                          • Reply to New AST under probate
                            by PGTV
                            I suppose someone has to pay for all this furlough money, so why not tax the dead more.

                            no wonder everyone is on a scam or fiddle. You can be like my parents - honest all their lives, but are getting hammered in death taxes. And both were failed by the NHS too
                            18-04-2021, 17:27 PM
                          Working...
                          X