Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 eviction

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 eviction

For readers who want to fight for their own rights in future:-

1. There are no 'legal authorities' at Wikipedia.
An authority is a previous case, cited as precedent in your case.
Meaning, the court has to apply the same judgement to the same facts.

2. I did not say I had an 'automatic right to counsel'.

3. I already have the best barrister on my side, as I've said, so I don't need another, lesser one.

A little encouragement for those who are USING this thread for their own purposes:
If I see something I feel needs reporting to the forum, I report it.
Please try and READ the facts before commenting, as you are pulling me away from essential legal work.
THINK - WOULD YOU WANT THIS DONE TO YOU?
I DON'T THINK SO.

Thankyou.

CORRECTION: there are 'authorities' quoted at Wikipedia, and yes, some of them are not in line with the point being made.

HOWEVER, no person acting, as I have been, to protect their home without legal assistance, should not be put off using Wikipedia. It offers quick and easy assistance to the 'unenlightened', and you might just find it, as I have done, FAR more help than any solicitor!

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 eviction

http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIHC/Master/2012/9.html

There is a helpful comment within this case which the Court recognises the rights under Article 8 HRA 1998

Althought it is not dealing with s21 notices you will at least draw a crumb of comfort on the judges ruling no doubt

Thankyou, and sorry, but I haven't got time to read it. If you'd like to post the comment to help others, so be it.

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 eviction

CONTENTS OF MY APPLICATION TO THE COURT, INCLUDING REQUEST TO SET ASIDE S21 POSSESSION ORDER
My application in these s21, so-called 'mandatory', proceedings was submitted to the county court yesterday.
It included 30 complaints and 14 other pieces of correspondence ignored by agents.
Serial breaches of contract by claimant and his agent(s).
The legal argument contained 10 Points:-
1. Tenancy document void ab initio: not read before signing; signed under duress; wrong for circumstances.
2. Wrong proceedings for the agreement therefore.
3. Limited deposit protection: franchised agents regularly make unlawful deductions.
4. Claim is part of a course of conduct a reasonable person would see as harassment.
5-10 Public law (human rights) defences which I will post after the court has considered them.

My application included request that the court:-
- set aside the possession order
- order appointment of new agent
- order drawing up of new tenancy document
- order damages and costs against claimant
- order restraint against bringing these proceedings whilst in breach of contract again
- to allow a fair and public trial, per Schedule 1, Part I, Article 6 Human Rights Act 1998, if necessary
- award the maximum extension of time to allow processing of legal aid application, if necessary (this was previously denied by the court)

Hearing this Wednesday, 23rd January 2013.

If the court disagrees with my human rights, it has to put me out in the snow.

THE GOVERNMENT WILFULLY IGNORES THE HUMAN RIGHTS OF THE HOMELESS
On the way home from submitting my application to the court yesterday, I gave some money to a homeless man, begging in the falling snow. He told me he'd been told the authorities wouldn't allow the use of empty houses on 'health and safety grounds'. I found out during my researches there are an estimated 1m homeless (half in shelters) and 0.71m registered empty houses alone (this exempts their owners from council tax).

The offence against the homeless people is degrading treatment, contrary to Schedule 1, Part 1, Article 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998:
"No one shall be subjected to...inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment"

Can a government be sued? oh yes.

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 eviction

PURPOSE OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS CONVENTION AND ACT
The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, from which our 1998 Act (above) derives, was drawn up after the 2nd world war, to prevent further atrocities and acts of inhumanity.

THE UK'S RECORD ON HUMAN RIGHTS OF TENANTS IS POOR
The lawyers who drew it up included English lawyers, and yet the UK courts have thus far denied human rights to tenants many times since the HRA 98 came into force in 2000. Some tenants have come away unsuccessful from the UK courts and taken their cases to the European Court of Human Rights, and won against the United Kingdom.

WHY JUDGES MUST START TO RECOGNISE THE HUMAN RIGHTS OF TENANTS
Apart from the fact that our human rights are inviolable as part of constitutional statute, Lord Neuberger, the highest acting judge in the UK, and acting President of the UK Supreme Court, has said that the judiciary should not fear the 'unsettling' of housing cases by the spreading impact of human rights. They certainly should not do so, because their Oath of Office is as follows:

"I, (name), do swear that I will well and truly serve our Sovereign Lady Queen Elizabeth in the office of (office), and I will do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of this realm (or colony), without fear or favour, affection or ill will"

POLICE COULD BE BREAKING THE LAW, WITH THE COURTS, DURING THE FORCIBLE EVICTION PROCESS
If a tenant resists eviction (we could call it unlawful eviction if their human rights have not been considered), the bailiffs cannot physically drag him or her from their home. For this, they would call the police, for a breach of the peace. Now read the Oath of Office of a United Kingdom policeman:

"I, ... of ... do solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm that I will well and truly serve the Queen in the office of constable, with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality, upholding fundamental human rights and according equal respect to all people; and that I will, to the best of my power, cause the peace to be kept and preserved and prevent all offences against people and property; and that while I continue to hold the said office I will to the best of my skill and knowledge discharge all the duties thereof faithfully according to law"

[PlanB]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 eviction

The first point in your defence is really interesting "Tenancy document void - not read before signing" because it could have wider implications since this happens a lot.

If the court accepts this argument could the Landlord then pursue you for tresspass or even squatting (now a criminal offence) if it's decided that you never did and therefore still don't have the legal right to occupy the property.

You seem very well prepared and I hope all goes well for you on Wednesday. Good Luck

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 eviction

The first point in your defence is really interesting "Tenancy document void - not read before signing" because it could have wider implications since this happens a lot.

If the court accepts this argument could the Landlord then pursue you for tresspass or even squatting (now a criminal offence) if it's decided that you never did and therefore still don't have the legal right to occupy the property.

You seem very well prepared and I hope all goes well for you on Wednesday. Good Luck

"could the Landlord then pursue you for trespass or even squatting (now a criminal offence) if it's decided that you never did and therefore still don't have the legal right to occupy the property"

No.

Trespass and squatting occur where there is no permission to enter, or live in, a property.
In my case, I was induced to contract, referenced and given permission to lawfully occupy the property by the agent.
This effectively means I was induced to contract, referenced and given permission to live there by the landlord.

Written documents are not required for a tenancy agreement to be in place.
The receiving of rent will show whether a tenancy without written agreement is in force.
However, if the document supplied is incorrect for the circumstances, it is possible your landlord cannot use the proceedings he is using, to evict you.
There are certain proceedings for each type of tenancy, and a landlord can't use the wrong type.
Unless the tenant lets him.

Thanks for the luck, PlanB :snowman3:

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 eviction

WHAT THE HIGHEST JUDGE IN THE LAND HAS TO SAY ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS
"while our commitment to the protection of human rights may seem weak because the courts cannot strike down legislation, in the long term the real extent of any commitment to the rule of law and human rights depends on society’s belief in it, and not on a voice of authority, no matter what that authority might be" - here, paragraph 23

~ Lord Neuberger, 2011 (then Master of the Rolls; now President)

What he's saying is: YOU, the people, are the authority. If you believe in the law, including human rights, it will succeed. The courts cannot change the laws, but if they are unfair, if they are incompatible, for example, with your fundamental human rights, YOU are the authority who will over-ride them in the courts, by demanding justice of the judiciary themselves. No judge can act unless you ask him or her to do so.

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 eviction

THE RESULTS OF MY HEARING
I was awarded none of my requests at the hearing yesterday.
I will probably be appealing the human rights defences in the next 13 days.

[pt2537]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 eviction

THE RESULTS OF MY HEARING
I was awarded none of my requests at the hearing yesterday.
I will probably be appealing the human rights defences in the next 13 days.

Why thirteen days?

If you are going to appeal you will need the transcript of the hearing, it is often overlooked but the CPR allows for a party to apply to extend the time for filing the appellants notice until such time as they have the transcript, especially where the person was a Litigant in Person.

So this will buy you time for appealing also.

It is unlikely the judge would refuse extending the time in such circumstances, in the appeals i have done there has never been a refusal.

I say that but it occurs to me you may have a note of the judgment as you said you had a QC friend or something if i recall, if there is a adequate note of the judgment then you are going to be straight into the Grouds of Appeal and Appellants notice etc seeking permission.

Dont forget to make an application within the appellants notice for a stay on the lower courts order while you are appealling, its often overlooked but very important to stop enforcement of the court order

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 eviction

Why thirteen days?

If you are going to appeal you will need the transcript of the hearing, it is often overlooked but the CPR allows for a party to apply to extend the time for filing the appellants notice until such time as they have the transcript, especially where the person was a Litigant in Person.

So this will buy you time for appealing also.

It is unlikely the judge would refuse extending the time in such circumstances, in the appeals i have done there has never been a refusal.

I say that but it occurs to me you may have a note of the judgment as you said you had a QC friend or something if i recall, if there is a adequate note of the judgment then you are going to be straight into the Grouds of Appeal and Appellants notice etc seeking permission.

Dont forget to make an application within the appellants notice for a stay on the lower courts order while you are appealling, its often overlooked but very important to stop enforcement of the court order

HEY - THANKS!!!! Was considering the transcript!

:fireside:

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 eviction

These were roughly the DJ's arguments on the human rights points:-

- s21(4)(a) HA 88 and article 8 not incompatible
- Magna Carta cannot be impliedly repealed since 2002 by s21(4)(a) HA 88: DJ couldn't see argument
- proportionality and legitimate aim: doesn't apply to private landlords
- personal circumstances: these are only considered in social cases
- possession order not justifiable: anyone who considered the law would say it was a mandatory situation

- my arguments claimed HRA 98 applies solely because I am human
- and I could not be discriminated against as opposed to other types of tenants, because the court is a public body
- and various articles of HRA 98 impliedly repealed s21(4)(a) HA 88 - in particular 3 (degrading treatment), 8 (home), 14 (discrimination).

I drew a schedule of disrepairs over 2 years 9 months for judge, and produced 30 written complaints to agent, all ignored. Also 14 other pieces of correspondence all ignored. DJ said there was no breach of contract by claimant, despite persistent denials of essential services, delays to repairs and refusals to repair, verbal threats of eviction, written threat to tenancy within first 6 weeks with no investigation (complaints received: neighbours wanted to continue partying outside every other day) but several police visits at my behest, written accusations (verbal abuse, bullying, causing a letting agent to burst into tears), verbal accusation (malicious damage - after 2 years of enforced overseeing of virtual renovation of appliances throughout property, repeated repair visits).

I pointed out I could not access civil remedies or exert my human rights, due to perceived right to evict for no reason, but this cannot be done, since through the Magna Carta, all law must be applied. This was the argument the DJ 'could not see'.

DJ commented I could take the government to court for serial loss of home under mandatory possession orders.

All technical defences were refuted in similar fashion. Maybe I will add these on receiving transcript.

September 12: claimant told me he wanted to sell property.
November 12: I found local landlord who wanted to buy and keep me as tenant. Agent told him it wasn't for sale.
January 13: claimant told court he just wanted to sell his property.

DJ seemed angry at one point and asked if I felt the claimant had any ownership rights.
I presume this was an attempt to blame me for claimant not selling, which I wasn't aware he wanted to.
Presumably, claimant would just put it on the market - I would have no rights.

Note to PlanB: after a pointless discussion that rent arrears remained stable, I pointed out there were no rent arrears since rent was withheld (due to breach of contract) with no s48 LTA 87 notice previously served. DJ: no response.

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 eviction

It's noteworthy that under article 6 HRA 98, one is entitled to 'fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal'.

It could be said that there's only one of those in the UK - the Supreme Court.

All lower courts are bound by higher decisions, and therefore have no independence whatsoever.
Impartiality is founded on independence, therefore it cannot be exercised.
Therefore, no lower court in the UK meets the requirements of the Human Rights Act.

The DJ who took my hearing was not able to overturn the possession order, not matter what he thought.
And he did mention being on the edge of his seat when these cases first came out.

He also mentioned it 'odd' that upon judgement you can ask for permission to appeal.
If the judge says yes, you can appeal.
If the judge says no, you can appeal.

He then told me that if I continued to ask permission to appeal, he was likely to say no.
Therefore, did I want to think it over?
I said I would.
:bedjump:

[PlanB]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 eviction

He also mentioned it 'odd' that upon judgement you can ask for permission to appeal.
If the judge says yes, you can appeal.
If the judge says no, you can appeal.

He then told me that if I continued to ask permission to appeal, he was likely to say no.
Therefore, did I want to think it over?
I said I would.
:bedjump:

I find it odd that the DJ didn't formally respond to your section 48 argument (we PM'd each other about this 11th hour addition before the hearing). Doesn't he have a duty to deal with each and every legal issue you raise PT knows more about reasons for getting an Appeal granted and won.

Maybe it's time this case got 'kicked upstairs'

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 eviction

I find it odd that the DJ didn't formally respond to your section 48 argument (we PM'd each other about this 11th hour addition before the hearing). Doesn't he have a duty to deal with each and every legal issue you raise PT knows more about reasons for getting an Appeal granted and won.

Maybe it's time this case got 'kicked upstairs'

Hi my friend,
Again, this is repossession on mandatory grounds - no reasons need be given.
No idea if judges need to respond to everything.
But if rent arrears weren't an issue, I guess it isn't necessary.
What he did in an hour was pretty good given there's no way (he said) to turn over these orders.

Thankyou about pt, noted.
Kicked upstairs, yes, well...we'll see...........
There's comes a point when private tenants may be regarded as 'human'...we'll see...
LOL
Apparently, only social tenants, terrorists and criminals are 'human'.
Whereas, presumably, private tenants are alien...which is reasonable... <titter> ...
AH HA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

:2w32gd1:

[PlanB]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 eviction

Dont forget to make an application within the appellants notice for a stay on the lower courts order while you are appealling, its often overlooked but very important to stop enforcement of the court order

^^^^ This point in PT's post leapt out at me. You must get a stay on yesterday's judgment to prevent your Landlord from getting an Eviction Warrant. As you said in an earlier post, you don't want to be out in the snow :smow: