Tweet
I have been working with someone who has been having issues with their former landlord.
The landlord had previously brought a claim to court against them for rent arrears and admin fees, which was defended with a counter claim for disrepair and failing to provide prescribed information under s213(6) of the Housing Act 2004. The landlord discontinued all of their claim and settled the counter claim. The settlement made no reference to the outstanding rent arrears.
The landlord then brought a seperate action after the tenant had moved out for the outstanding rent arrears and admin fees. The rent arrears were largely the same as the previous claim along with an amount which was more than the outstanding rent in late fees and admin fees. The landlord did not request permission of the court to begin proceedings to begin this action which arose out of facts similar to the first discontinued claim.
The tenant put in a defence against this, citing that the landlord had made a claim on largely the same facts as before in terms of the rent, that the fees did not comply with the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and that the claimant had failed to obtain permission of the courts to begin another claim (since the last claim was discontinued and they had made a defence against it).
A trial date was allocated and the landlord failed to pay the trial fee, which resulted in the claim being struck out automatically, a month after it was struck out, the landlord successfully applied to set aside the judgement and the claim reinstated, however they did not pay the outstanding trial fee until a further month later.
I have helped this tenant successfully apply to set aside that judgement and have the claim struck out again, as the landlord failed to provide any evidence of the reasons why he failed to pay the trial fee by the deadline and that the reasons given were did not show any good cause for his failure to act, he had significant time to pay the fee, the deadline was only a week into the lockdown and he had a month prior to this to pay it (he also had access to email and cheque facility so he could have contacted the court or sent the cheque on the day that lockdown was announced, the court accepted both of these arguments). The claim has been struck out again as the Judge agreed that the landlord failed to comply with the CPR and also had no good reason to fail to act.
The tenant is now concerned that the landlord may make another attempt at this, whether that be to set aside this judgement or to begin new proceedings. It would be good to hear some views on this?
The landlord had previously brought a claim to court against them for rent arrears and admin fees, which was defended with a counter claim for disrepair and failing to provide prescribed information under s213(6) of the Housing Act 2004. The landlord discontinued all of their claim and settled the counter claim. The settlement made no reference to the outstanding rent arrears.
The landlord then brought a seperate action after the tenant had moved out for the outstanding rent arrears and admin fees. The rent arrears were largely the same as the previous claim along with an amount which was more than the outstanding rent in late fees and admin fees. The landlord did not request permission of the court to begin proceedings to begin this action which arose out of facts similar to the first discontinued claim.
The tenant put in a defence against this, citing that the landlord had made a claim on largely the same facts as before in terms of the rent, that the fees did not comply with the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and that the claimant had failed to obtain permission of the courts to begin another claim (since the last claim was discontinued and they had made a defence against it).
A trial date was allocated and the landlord failed to pay the trial fee, which resulted in the claim being struck out automatically, a month after it was struck out, the landlord successfully applied to set aside the judgement and the claim reinstated, however they did not pay the outstanding trial fee until a further month later.
I have helped this tenant successfully apply to set aside that judgement and have the claim struck out again, as the landlord failed to provide any evidence of the reasons why he failed to pay the trial fee by the deadline and that the reasons given were did not show any good cause for his failure to act, he had significant time to pay the fee, the deadline was only a week into the lockdown and he had a month prior to this to pay it (he also had access to email and cheque facility so he could have contacted the court or sent the cheque on the day that lockdown was announced, the court accepted both of these arguments). The claim has been struck out again as the Judge agreed that the landlord failed to comply with the CPR and also had no good reason to fail to act.
The tenant is now concerned that the landlord may make another attempt at this, whether that be to set aside this judgement or to begin new proceedings. It would be good to hear some views on this?
