2nd
Jun 2015
Neighbours in the previously quiet area were not happy
Tenant refused to be interviewed by Benefits Office
Council and courts twice lose paperwork
Judge refuses permission for Hogan to appoint High Court Bailiff but Landlord still achieves this
House left in filthy state after eviction
Another cautionary tale from PIM’s member, Vincent Hogan, a landlord who lives in Caterham, Surrey who decided to invest in a three bed roomed house in Stoke. The Tenant ran up arrears and the property was trashed.
Vincent let a three bed roomed property out to a couple on benefits in Stoke –on- Trent and for his troubles has lost over £4910 in rent, damage and legal costs. The property requires a total refurbishment as it was left in a filthy state covered in dog excrement, urine and drug paraphernalia.
In October 2012 the Tenants moved into the property in Davy Close Stoke on Trent, with her partner and two sons. Vincent took out all the necessary precautions including a CCJ and Credit checks and found nothing wrong in her past history.
Vincent takes up the story: “They seemed a pleasant couple and everything rolled along nicely for the next 14-15 months and then the couple split and the partner left.” Sadly over time the tenant’s circumstances changed and this was when her conduct deteriorated.
After the split the next five months the rent was paid on time by the Council until she was notified in June 2014 that her benefits would be stopped, as her partner had left. She was told that they would be re-instated after an interview with the Benefits’ Office. Hogan found out by the end of July that she had not complied with the request and spoke to her about resolving this. The correspondence from the Council did tell her that the rent would be stopped being paid to her landlord.
In August 2014, Vincent issued a Section 8 and attended a court hearing. Before the hearing took place the tenant’s legal aid solicitor told him that she could delay the process for months, by querying the deposit, the amount owed and claiming that the house was dangerous to live in. Vincent decided to agree on a 30 day re-hearing to give her time to arrange an interview with the Benefits’ Office.
Vincent Hogan said: “After the hearing I had a chat with the tenant and even offered to take her round to the Benefits’ Office and for one reason or another she couldn’t that day. She did promise me that she would do this in time for the next hearing.”
Over the next month Vincent waited for the hearing date and after many phone calls he was finally given the 27th November, as his day in court.
At the second hearing, the judge asked Hogan if he could supply him with the details of the first hearing as he had not been given the papers. He was granted both money and possession orders together with eviction permission.
As advised by PIMS at the hearing Vincent asked the Judge to be granted permission to use a High Court Bailiff, which despite there being thousands of pounds in rent arrears, was turned down as it was seen to be too heavy handed. Hogan contacted the County Court Bailiff to be informed that there was such a backlog it may take three months before the County Court Bailiffs could evict.
Hogan called PIMS members helpline to be advised he could request for a variation of the original Judges order and seek permission to use a High Court Enforcement Officer [private bailiff]. This was granted within a matter of days.
Vincent called the Courts Department to arrange a High Court hearing only to be told that they had lost his application. He was eventually accepted by Birmingham City’s High Court and appointed Marston’s of Birmingham to provide high court officers at the hearing.
The primary benefit of using a High Court Bailiff is the tenant receives no prior communication, this means tenants who may become malicious are not warned and helps minimise the risk of tenants becoming vindictive and trashing a property – The Bailiffs and Police simply turn up on a date determined by the courts.
Without warning the Bailiffs arrived and on the day of the eviction, a new partner of the tenant started to become very aggressive towards the Landlord and Bailiffs, so much so, the police had to be called in. Half an hour later the police calmed the partner down and told him in no uncertain terms that the eviction had nothing to do with him and that the landlord was within his rights. The tenant gave in by handing over the keys and left the property.
The Tenants may have left but not their American Pit Bull who was left in the lounge, luckily the Police officer on hand was an experienced dog handler and managed to control it and arranged for a Charity to take care of the abandoned dog.
Inside the house Hogan did not expect to be faced with the catastrophic amount of dog faeces and urine that had ruined all of the floorings throughout the property. He was also outraged to find in the main bedroom was squalid with empty food cartons strewn all over the room along with drug paraphernalia.
Vincent said: “I had followed everything to the letter of the law and had properly prepared myself by reading all the articles and information from the PIMS’ website. The customer service team at PIMS Landlord’s website was so helpful and nothing was too much trouble....unlike other Landlord’s Associations that I have in the past joined.
“What is wrong with people who have a house paid for them in a nice residential area and would be unlikely ever be able to afford such surroundings, why do they refuse to pay the rent and trash the house?
“I feel I betrayed the neighbours for they had to live next door to this situation for months.”
Richard Merrick, of PIMS, said: “In all of these types of cases we always advise our members, that although it may seem that the law protect those tenant’s who can’t or won’t pay their rent, that you must always protect themselves against fear of legal reprisals.
“Evicting Tenants is fraught with problems and many people do not realise it can take months from an initial notice to eviction, to regain possession of one’s property.
“It is ironic really that all of our members pay taxes which funds Legal Aid, some of which is underserved.”
Lessons to be learnt from Vincent’s experience
People’s lives change and when they do it’s not always for the best, a guarantor from the outset would have provided recourse to recover losses.
As soon as you become aware of arrears you must issue a section 21 and or 8 at the earliest possible time.
Sometimes with Benefits tenants, it is wiser to leave them as a periodic tenancy because if a new partner come on to the scene, not only can they influence the tenants behaviour but if they cohabitate, the housing benefit may be reduced. In this instance eviction had to be via Section 8 as there was a long period remaining on the fixed tenancy so a Section 21 could not be used.
Despite the size of Vincent’s loss the Judge had little sympathy.
News Archive »