Tweet
Morning all,
Question for the legal beagles that know Scottish Property - Renting Law:
After taking landlord to the PRHP due to non compliance with Maintenance Standard (PRHP decision is pending but think they will find in tenants favor) the tenant was given notice to quit the property by landlord (at the PRHP hearing) , it would seem as a vindictive retaliation. Note:
So assuming all the paper work is in order from the landlord, does the tenant have any redress if the Landlord moves to an actual eviction after the notice period?
The lack of maintenance is well logged and will be formal if PRHP finds in favor of tenant, so I was wondering if this could be used in a defense against an eviction? Would the Judge deny the eviction if it is clear that this is a vindictive retaliation against the tenant? Note the tenant has only requested maintenance, and this should have been done as per the Housing Act legislation
The PRHP seems like a very good service to protect tenants, however it looses it's usefulness if Landlords can evict tenants as a retaliation. Tenants will fear eviction and not flag problems to the PRHP thus completely undermining the maintenance standard. I do know the PRHP can place maintenance requirements on deeds, but this does not stop vindictive landlords asking the current tenant to leave - hardly an incentive to flag problems.
So I was wondering if anyone had any legal experience in this area, and if the Judge may throw out an eviction on the grounds that it is retaliatory and vindictive? I guess the landlord is following the "Best practice for slum landlords" !
Regards
Beachcomber
Question for the legal beagles that know Scottish Property - Renting Law:
After taking landlord to the PRHP due to non compliance with Maintenance Standard (PRHP decision is pending but think they will find in tenants favor) the tenant was given notice to quit the property by landlord (at the PRHP hearing) , it would seem as a vindictive retaliation. Note:
- the Landlord has not maintained the property over a long period (more than two years)
- tenant has been there for a long time more than 3 years.
- Tenant has been a good long term tenant.
- Tenant finally got fed up of no maintenance and as a last resort, used the PRHP.
- Tenant also withheld rent for last 4 or so months. They notified the Landlord that due to no maintenance, which was a breach of the lease, reduced rent would continue until maintenance was carried out.
- Maintenance issues were needed on grounds of hygiene (inner building had defects with plumbing fittings etc)
So assuming all the paper work is in order from the landlord, does the tenant have any redress if the Landlord moves to an actual eviction after the notice period?
The lack of maintenance is well logged and will be formal if PRHP finds in favor of tenant, so I was wondering if this could be used in a defense against an eviction? Would the Judge deny the eviction if it is clear that this is a vindictive retaliation against the tenant? Note the tenant has only requested maintenance, and this should have been done as per the Housing Act legislation
The PRHP seems like a very good service to protect tenants, however it looses it's usefulness if Landlords can evict tenants as a retaliation. Tenants will fear eviction and not flag problems to the PRHP thus completely undermining the maintenance standard. I do know the PRHP can place maintenance requirements on deeds, but this does not stop vindictive landlords asking the current tenant to leave - hardly an incentive to flag problems.
So I was wondering if anyone had any legal experience in this area, and if the Judge may throw out an eviction on the grounds that it is retaliatory and vindictive? I guess the landlord is following the "Best practice for slum landlords" !
Regards
Beachcomber
