"Burden of Proof" issue regarding deposit.

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

    "Burden of Proof" issue regarding deposit.

    got a problem with getting what could be called a deposit back.

    (refer to http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums...ad.php?t=17033 for background information)

    How exactly would I be able to prove that I did pay an extra £347, if it goes to court (which it will because I'm getting no reply at all from the l/l's agent)?

    I have the first receipt of payment that states I've paid £80 "to get the room first" deposit (so to speak) and £614 thereafter, and a collection of some receipts proving I paid £347 each month, but due to the way they collected the rent (cash money due to troubles of getting standing order set up) I lack some receipts, as some months they didn't leave one.

    I'm thinking it's pretty logical that despite me lacking some receipts, if I didn't pay a months rent I would have been evicted anyway, so is the burden of proof actually needed at all? If and when it goes to court, I just want to have things ready so I don't fall flat on my face the minute I get into the courtroom.

    #2
    Anyone? I'm kinda getting leaned on to do something about this whole deposit-owed issue.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by liquidgravity View Post

      I'm thinking it's pretty logical that despite me lacking some receipts, if I didn't pay a months rent I would have been evicted anyway, so is the burden of proof actually needed at all? If and when it goes to court, I just want to have things ready so I don't fall flat on my face the minute I get into the courtroom.
      I'm thinking it's pretty illogical to assume the above!

      There are a number of reasons why you would not have been evicted for missing a month's rent, the most compelling being that at least two month's rent have to be owed for a LL to be able to issue a section 8 ground 8 notice with an odds-on chance of evicting you. Second, even if you were owing two months' rent at any point, as soon as you paid another instalment, the debt would drop, and make the section 8 less likely to succeed, so your LL may have judged it a waste of time and money.

      Other reasons are that the LL would know that this section 8 route can take months to result in an eviction and costs money, so he may have decided just to 'get you out' by the usual section 21 notice route.

      I do not know what proof a court would require, I'm sorry. I'm sure someone else will. Be patient.
      'Pause you who read this, and think for a moment of the long chain of iron or gold, of thorns or flowers, that would never have bound you, but for the formation fo the first link on one memorable day'. Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by liquidgravity
        I'm thinking it's pretty logical that despite me lacking some receipts, if I didn't pay a months rent I would have been evicted anyway, so is the burden of proof actually needed at all? If and when it goes to court, I just want to have things ready so I don't fall flat on my face the minute I get into the courtroom.
        Unfortunately landlords cannot snap their fingers and evict a tenant.

        You have no proof. I really don't know what you can do about that now. For your own sake in future, you really must get an itemised receipt every single time you hand over cash.

        Comment

        Latest Activity

        Collapse

        Working...
        X