Terms & Conditions

[Lee Horwell]

Hi all

Need a bit of advice on this ongoing case I have.

Customer has had no contact with her landlord for at least 5/6 years. For the last 3 years rent has been paid directly to her following a tribunal hearing. She was advised at that time that she should save the HB payments in case the landlord at some point asked her for the rent. She was also advised by the Tribunal chairman that if any remedial works needed to be done on the property, that she should save receipts so this amount could be taken into account by the landlord.

We’ve now revisited the case due to a review, and are obviously interested in what the current state of play is.

She’s still had no contact from the landlord, so we asked for evidence of her bank account/receipts for repairs to the property. So far, she’s provided nothing to suggest any repairs have been done (certainly not to the value of the HB paid in total) and the bank account has a constant zero balance.

I’m now tempted to try again re: non-commercial/no liability, but am unsure as to what angle to go for.

Anyone have any thoughts on how they’d proceed with this one?? Any help would be much appreciated…….. 😕

[Anonymous]

What has she done with the HB? If she is saving it that would at least suggest that there is an intention to honour the liability. Otherwise…? Have you tried contacting the landlord yourself?

[John Boxall]

Do you know why the landlord isnt collecting the rent?

What was the original tribunal case about?

Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery. The blossom is blighted, the leaf is withered, the god of day goes down upon the dreary scene, and—and in short you are for ever floored.

Wilkins Micawber, Ch12 David Copperfield

[Chris Robbins]

I am a bit confused. If you had a tribunal decision 3 years ago but even at that point she had had no contact with her landlord for 2/3 years, are you saying that prior to the tribunal hearing payment was being made to the landlord? Or was no payment being made at all?

If you are saying that she has paid no rent for 5/6 years the first observation must be that payments to your claimant have to stop immediately. Where there are arrears of 8+ weeks we are required to make any future payments directly to the landlord.

Having said that I would agree with you that this is a no true liability case. Whatever tenancy agreement she originally had must have expired and in the absence of a new agreement it would have become a statutory periodic tenancy. Given that no action has been taken to requesat rent payments or to take action over accrued arrears I think you have sufficient to end entitlement on the grounds of no true liability. What date you make that decision from is another matter…

[Lee Horwell]

Sorry – meant to include in my previous post that we’ve tried to contact the landlord – he lives in the London area and our customer is in the Midlands – but had no joy. We’ve written to him several times and also tried to ring him on the telephone number that is showing on CIS (he’s an ESA claimant).

She’s not saved any of the HB – as soon as it’s paid into her account, it’s pretty much spent (regular withdrawals during the four week period).

We originally submitted an appeal as ‘no liability’, but her appeal was allowed as the chairman was satisifed that her liability continued on its original basis as she had not been served with any notice to relinquish occupation.

[John Boxall]

Might be worth contacting the London Borough where the claimant lives.

If he’s on ESA he could be claiming there or known to Social Services

Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery. The blossom is blighted, the leaf is withered, the god of day goes down upon the dreary scene, and—and in short you are for ever floored.

Wilkins Micawber, Ch12 David Copperfield

[Lee Horwell]

Thanks all.

Chris – prior to the Tribunal, payment was being made to the landlord by cheque – there had been a number of unpresented cheques, which led to us investigating the claim in the first place.

John – contacted the London Borough previously, they have no further information about him – he’s definitely still resident and has had recent contact with them re: his ESA (don’t think they know he owns this property tho’!).

The DWP notes suggest that he has an addiction problem, so whether this has any bearing on the current situation, I don’t know.

[Anonymous]

Two frauds going on here then!

LL – undeclared property (I assume you’ve checked he does own it)

CLT – sham tenancy

n.b I’ve waited years to prosecute two people for a Statutory Conspiracy, since I learned about the offence on a PINS course. Perhaps this is one! I know it’s covered by SSAA but the conspiracy offence sounds so much more exciting

[Author]

Posts