Section 21 idiot judges

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

    Section 21 idiot judges

    There have been a number of posters here recently who have submitted a correct Section 21 form to a court, to have it thrown out incorrectly.

    I dread ever having to submit one of these, because it begins to look as if judges are so prejudiced against us evil landlords, that they make the law up as they go along.

    Can anyone suggest a solution?

    #2
    Yes

    Originally posted by JK0 View Post
    There have been a number of posters here recently who have submitted a correct Section 21 form to a court, to have it thrown out incorrectly.

    I dread ever having to submit one of these, because it begins to look as if judges are so prejudiced against us evil landlords, that they make the law up as they go along.

    Can anyone suggest a solution?
    Yes,go to courts where theses s21 have been thrown out and call the Judge a idiot in the court room,instead of a forum
    Thunderbirds are go

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by 45002 View Post
      Yes,go to courts where theses s21 have been thrown out and call the Judge a idiot in the court room,instead of a forum
      Thanks 45002, although I'm not really sure if you agree with me, or are being sarcastic. (Smile)

      Comment


        #4
        I would suggest that any n5b application where there is a difference between 'rent periods' and 'tenancy periods' be acompanied by a letter to the judge including something like this:

        You will notice that the last fixed term tenancy came to an end on xx/xx/20xx. By default the first period of the statutory periodic tenancy ran from the following day (yy/xx/20xx) until xx/x+1/20xx and all subsequent periods ran from the yy of one month to xx of the following.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by JK0 View Post
          Can anyone suggest a solution?
          To avoid the problem of judges who don't know the difference between tenancy periods and rental periods, ensure that the tenancy contract makes the potential SPT periods coincide with rental periods.

          To avoid the problem of judges who think that a s.21(1)(b) has to expire at the end of a tenancy period, serve the notice either to expire "after" the last day of the fixed term, or, if serving it less than two months before fixed term expiry, play the same game and make the notice comply with s.21(4)(a) even when you know it doesn't have to (of course, the downside to this is that it'd encourage the misguided judges to think they're right).

          The best solution would be for someone to take an example of each of these common errors to a higher court and establish case law on the issues.

          Comment


            #6
            Thanks Westminster and Snorkerz. Those are both helpful ideas.

            Comment


              #7
              The allocation of a judge is often on the basis of availability not speciality, as CC have a wide jurisdiction.

              My advice follows Snorkerz, treat the court as if you are explaining the case as if someone were unfamiliar with the law.

              Remember the Judge is not there to help you, you are there to put your case.

              A summary of the position, the relevant dates and how the section 21, or any notice, fits those facts is of great help to the court.
              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


                #8
                Well I hope I'm forgiven for hoping for more from our court system!.

                Why do we have courts ? well in my (very basic) view for civil cases it is when two parties or more cannot agree that they have upheld their contractual obligations and therefore require the legal opinion (and any subsequent order) of the more knowledgeable in our land - that being those deemed knowledgeable enough to hold position of Judge and thus paid to hold these appointments.

                To then have to hold their hand and inform them of point of law I find somewhat demoralising.
                I'm a good tenant with great landlords
                I'm also a living, breathing, fully cooked female.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Thanks Brb. My thoughts entirely.

                  I think what annoys me most is the self-righteous ignorance of them. They have obviously read somewhere that a Section 21 form is invalid under certain circumstances. That they then go and misinterpret what they have read, to the detriment of the plaintiff seems perverse.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Hm.

                    We have out barristers are wonderful threads.

                    We have our county court judges are idiots threads.

                    Most county court judges are barristers.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      I'd still rather have a barrister inexperienced in the field of law in question than an inexperienced solicitor. You just have to argue your case well, which is true of any claim.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        The first stage of education for solicitors and barristers is the same - either a qualifying law degree or another degree followed by the Common Professional Examination. After that solicitors take the Legal Practice Course and barristers the Bar Professional Training Course, both of which take an academic year. So, before they get down to on the job training, both solicitors and barristers have done an equal amount of study. A trainee solicitor spends two years training, usually spending time in four different areas. A pupil barrister's training is for a year and is quite different and depends on the chambers he joins. A pupil in property or commercial chambers will typically spend his year analysing legal problems and doing research in whatever his chambers specialises in. Given that the one of the roles of barristers is to answer difficult questions, a pupil barrister is going to acquire more detailed knowledge in a given area than a trainee solicitor, and that continues after training is completed. Unless they work in a very large firm, solicitors do not get the same opportunity to specialise in narrow fields and much of the work they deal with will be routine. A chancery Q.C. only gets difficult problems. You get to be a specialist because you specialise, not because of some innate ability. Whilst barristers may be socially superior to solicitors, they are not intellectually superior.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Having also suffered from poor advice from solicitors and barristers alike in the past, and had to pay a a lot of money for the privilege, I wonder how the fees can be justified. Often the results of wrong or poor advice, or badly drafted documents do not surface for a long period, when they do they can cause all sorts of problems with a contract that was thought to be done and dusted long ago. There seems to be no sanction that can be applied to someone that does a poor job of drafting.

                          I always read LC's comments on drafting with great interest, even there though he makes the point that clarity is the devil's own job to make in written clauses.
                          I offer no guarantee that anything I say is correct. wysiwyg

                          Comment


                            #14
                            So the barrister, experienced in say family matters, becomes a judge in the County Court, dealing primarily with those matters as her speciality.

                            Then one morning a Judge, falling ill, results in her being assigned to a possession case, and after listening to the plaintiff's counsel, admits

                            " I have no idea what Section 2 of the Rent Act 1977 says, didn't a Housing Act change all that.... I deal with family matters"
                            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


                              #15
                              I think you have a point LHA.

                              What really grates with me is that a judge who has no idea what the law is, rules against a landlord out of instinctive prejudice. In both cases recently the tenant never even raised the point about the Section 21's being invalid.

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X