Drug dealing lodger

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

  • classicbike
    replied
    Thank you all for your comments. I'll let the LL know, and will also keep this thread updated with the results.

    Leave a comment:


  • Solent Watcher
    replied
    classicbike, stop,with due respect, faffing about he is "an excluded occupier" as stated earlier. Type those words into search engine and it will give you the full picture. He has virtually no rights so kick him out and if necessary have some physically support, preferably old bill, but if not an "uncle" or two. Remember you can use public order to get old bill there because you feel there will be violence etc and if you have already reported it to the old bill they will have an incident number to link it to.

    In summary "remove" PRONTO and just fit a new door if necessary!! Just go there and say GO NOW!!!

    I have absolutley no time for these types of people!!!! Go sort it

    Leave a comment:


  • Snorkerz
    replied
    Originally posted by jta View Post
    I don't think it changes the thrust of the landlords remedy though.
    Agreed

    Leave a comment:


  • jta
    replied
    I know it's nitpicking, but if the landlord was denied entry when he had entry before with his key, then I think it could be classed as 'damage'. Albeit not serious. I don't think it changes the thrust of the landlords remedy though.

    Leave a comment:


  • Snorkerz
    replied
    Originally posted by jta View Post
    However he did not have the landlords permission, .
    Accepting Westminster et als assurances that a tenancy with a resident landlord does not compromise the eviction, I would add that classicbikes says the lodger 'changed' the lock, implying that there was already a landlord-supplied one there.

    Leave a comment:


  • jta
    replied
    The lodger had the lock on his door changed without informing the LL
    However he did not have the landlords permission, that makes it deliberate damage to the door.
    It doesn't count as exclusive possession.

    Leave a comment:


  • boletus
    replied
    Originally Posted by boletus
    If your lodger has a lock on his door and you do not have a key, and you have not entered the room without his permission for several months or years, then he may well have a tenancy.

    Originally posted by westminster View Post
    The issue of whether the lodger has a tenancy or not is irrelevant to OP's friend's problem, which relates to eviction.

    I was responding to the relevant point about the door lock made by snorkerz;

    - BUT - classisbike mentions the lock on the lodgers door. This implies that the lodger had exclusive use of part of the premises.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bel
    replied
    I agree with Westminster. As long as the lodger or tenant is sharing facilities with the landlord eg kitchen or bathroom, the landlord can evict

    If the landlord has separate facilities within the same house, then he may not be able to evict without a court order.

    Leave a comment:


  • westminster
    replied
    Originally posted by boletus View Post
    If your lodger has a lock on his door and you do not have a key, and you have not entered the room without his permission for several months or years, then he may well have a tenancy."
    The issue of whether the lodger has a tenancy or not is irrelevant to OP's friend's problem, which relates to eviction.

    Either way, whether the occupier has a licence or tenancy, if the LL is resident the occupier is an excluded occupier and can be evicted without a court order.

    Leave a comment:


  • boletus
    replied
    I'm with jta on this.

    I think in this case the lock on the lodgers door is a red herring. I can't find anything specific on locks but this seems applicable;

    http://pntodd.users.netlink.co.uk/ca...s/street_m.htm
    "Exclusive possession is of first importance in considering whether an occupier is a tenant; exclusive possession is not decisive because an occupier who enjoys exclusive possession is not necessarily a tenant. The occupier may be a lodger or service occupier or fall within the other exceptional categories mentioned by Denning LJ in Errington v Errington."

    see also;
    http://www.lodgerlandlord.co.uk/2010...-and-a-tenant/
    "The lodger must not have ‘exclusive occupation’.

    This means, basically, that you must not let him put a lock on the door of his room (or indeed any other room) and keep you out. You must maintain the right to go in the room from time to time, although respecting your lodgers privacy at all times.

    If your lodger has a lock on his door and you do not have a key, and you have not entered the room without his permission for several months or years, then he may well have a tenancy."

    (cross posted with westminster)

    Leave a comment:


  • westminster
    replied
    Originally posted by classicbike View Post
    Despite the lack of a signed ageement, does the LL have a chance of evicting the lodger?
    The lack of a written contract is irrelevant.

    The lodger can be evicted without a court order because the LL is resident. LL must give 'reasonable' notice (either written or verbal) then, if lodger fails to vacate, LL is entitled to change the locks whilst the lodger is out and refuse re-entry. Reasonable notice in this case would be 24 hours.

    For further details on how to evict a lodger, see the following link. It is written by a specialist in landlord and tenant law, and I assure you it's the correct legal position.
    http://www.lodgerlandlord.co.uk/2010...r-who-wont-go/

    Leave a comment:


  • westminster
    replied
    Originally posted by Snorkerz View Post
    I am going to wait for some one with more knowledge than I to confirm this - BUT - classisbike mentions the lock on the lodgers door. This implies that the lodger had exclusive use of part of the premises.
    But not granted by the LL. In any case, the LL is still a resident LL, and even if the lodger did have tenancy status he can be evicted without a court order. The only implications of a resident LL granting a tenancy is that s.11 repairing obligations kick in, and LL may be in breach of mortgage/insurance etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • Snorkerz
    replied
    I am going to wait for some one with more knowledge than I to confirm this - BUT - classisbike mentions the lock on the lodgers door. This implies that the lodger had exclusive use of part of the premises. I am not clear on the line between lodger (shares facilities) and tenant (exclusive use) but I would be very careful to clarify the 'lodgers' exact status before following the 'lodger eviction' route.

    Leave a comment:


  • oaktree
    replied
    Thee is also the possibility that if the LL leaves it to long and the police take action before he notifies them, he could also be charged with allowing his property to be used. He needs to speak up now.

    Leave a comment:


  • jta
    replied
    There's only one answer to this.

    Get rid of the lodger, give him half an hour's notice and tell him to go, if he will not leave then ask the police for assistance to remove him.

    If the police have to come and find evidence of dealing they are going to remove him to the station.

    Show signs of weakness and they will take advantage.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Activity

Collapse

Working...
X