Options

Just Been Evicted...

RedjeepRedjeep ✭✭✭

I work about 2 hours away from my house and so have stayed in shared accommodation  from Mon - Fri for the last few years. This has worked out okay for the most part but was starting to get on top of me for the last couple of months, mostly due to one particular house mate.

So I decided to move into another, separate apartment and signed the contract on Monday afternoon. The owner is a local solicitor and I had to go to his office to sign, but he left it to the receptionist to deal with (being far too important, obviously).

I had a couple of questions about the contract and she went away and came with answers and I was happy to sign and pay the deposit and the month's rent in advance.

Next day, the solicitor rings me (well he actually got his receptionist to ring me and then transfer me through to him) and tells me the advice I was given was wrong.

As it happened it didn't really bother me, but as his entire pompous attitude had bugged me, I made a comment about 'well that's the second mistake you've made regarding this rental agreement, as the apartment isn't the same one you had advertised' and to cut a long story a little shorter, he told me to leave and wanted me out of the flat the next day. I laughed at him and mentioned the fact that we have signed contracts etc, so legally he has to give me 28 days and his comment was 'well sue me then'.

Anyway, as I'm not that impressed with the flat and can easily move back where I was, I agreed to move out by Monday, and in reality will be gone by tomorrow morning.

I'm not really posting this looking for any legal advice, more out of amusement at the way some tossers can behave.

I'm also quite impressed that I only lasted one night and wondered if this was a record.

 

 

 

Comments

  • Options
    WombleWomble ✭✭✭

    Even if you have been given notice to quit you don't have to leave. You can wait until your landlord goes to court to get an eviction order. I hope you don't get  messed about over any money you might have paid.

  • Options
    NayanNayan ✭✭✭
    Presumably the deposit was held by the letting agent? Anyway did you get your cash back?
  • Options
    MuttleyMuttley ✭✭✭

    You're fortunate that you can find it funny. For some, of course, it would be a disaster.

    Maybe the government could do something about crap private-sector landlords by, for example, enabling tenants to buy their homes. A kind of right to buy.

  • Options
    NayanNayan ✭✭✭
    When I think about it, right to buy forces social landlords to sell houses at artificially cheap prices to tenants. They don't like this so they respond by restricting the amount of social housing and building less of it. It's a pretty stupid policy in terms of numbers and the only justification is that owner occupiers are more invested and care more about their surround era than renters (there is evidence for that of course). Either way it results in less affordable housing not more.



    Extending right to buy to the private sector would have similar unintended consequences. Any landlords willing to rent their flats out under those terms would demand much more compensation in rent. you'd probably get less buy to let activity of course. On balance It's not clear that it would help renters one bit though.
  • Options
    WombleWomble ✭✭✭

    Well said, Nayan. I work for a homeless charity and you wouldn't believe how unpopular the proposal to extend right to buy to housing associations is. As a nation, we are fixated on home ownership when so many people don't have and can't get a home of any sort at all, rent or buy. 

  • Options
    VDOT52VDOT52 ✭✭✭
    The right to buy would work if the money from sales was forced into finding to build new homes, which it won't be, so therefore the problem Nayan describes will undoubtedly occur.



    The problem in the UK is that housing has become an investment stream, mostly pushed by the govt and the banking industry. It is just a pyramid scheme though and the cracks have already started to appear. Where I live the councils are selling off car parks next to playing fields and then creating parking on the playing fields, so in effect they are selling off green spaces for housing and all because of an obsession with London. There is loads of shit land and shit areas outside London that would be improved by new housing and infrastructure schemes, yet London is being constantly squeezed because housing is at a premium.
  • Options
    RicFRicF ✭✭✭

    I live in a cul-de-sac (in London) where parking is at a premium. The reason is, the houses were put up in the mid 1950's when no one at the time imagined sixty years later that someone will be wanting to park an XC90.

    The neighbours are a mix of council tenants (originals in two cases), leaseholders, freeholders and renters from private landlords (more common, it's the schools).

    Some of the newest arrivals complain bitterly about this lack of parking. The fact they could park 100 yards away doesn't alter this view. It's the council fault. And if they can't park where they should, they'll park where the f..k they like and can.

    See below.

    /members/images/493151/Gallery/park1.jpg

     

    /members/images/493151/Gallery/park.jpg

     

    This forecourt is a private area owned by the council. It's parking for garage holders (like me) only. It should be completely empty of vehicles.

    The fact that most garage owners couldn't access their own garages on account of this lot made no difference, until now.

    The council turned up unannounced one morning and put bollards and lock down posts right across the entrances.

    Complaints! just a few.

    When people complain about being denied the right to trespass and inconvenience others just to avoid a short walk, you wonder what you're dealing with. What other strokes are they pulling with their pushy 'me first' attitude?

    🙂

  • Options
    VDOT52VDOT52 ✭✭✭
    Where I live is not much better. All 60's private built but essentially similar. We all have garages but when they built the housing, no one assumed that the number of bedrooms would mean an equal number of cars by 2015. Crazy.



    Even now planning only requires 1 parking space to be provided per flat, when in reality a 2 bed flat with a couple living in it Renting out the spare room will usually mean 3 cars somehow supposed to fit into one space. Madness.
  • Options
    RedjeepRedjeep ✭✭✭

    Muttley. I agree and realise that I'm fortunate enough to be in a position where I can walk away and find it amusing rather than a disaster. I honestly think that the problem was that because of this I was prepared to stand up to the pompous pr!ck rather than just accept everything he said.

    Womble - I did tell him that as far as I was concerned he had to give me 28 days notice, but in fairness it was just easier to leave as I hadn't actually moved in, other than just bare essentials. It would have been different if I'd been there for any time and I couldn't just walk away. 

     

Sign In or Register to comment.