what judgements can a Court deliver in a case of Acc Possesion/S21?.
Hello colleagues. Looking for those who've been through this process & know the ropes.
Basically...paid £355 to action accelerated re-possession. Tnts submitted an irrelevant defence about my un-cooperation accept part- payment plans. The truth was that of course I accepted the ppplans...one would to get income. Trouble was the plans [plural] resulted in paying off a few pounds off 9 months[ & climbing] of arrear. Warned I would serve S21 [so what] & did so.
The tnts filed 'a defence' to my case. In that they ticked yes to receiving the required documents which validated the S21...no problem I thought. Their defence hinges on me not including info in their original AST about a RENT Charge attached to the property. This wasn't true in 2015 when they signed originally, but become true when they signed the next AST in 2016.A statement to that effect was included as per rules/regs about those who have a claim against a property..usually mortgage comp. The facts were ignored yet there to see in the disclosure docs I provided...also the Court will be able to read that explanation about the Rent Charge clearly shown in the 2nd AST. I'm hoping the Court will attempt to assess what material loss[if any] they've suffered by the RENT Charge being laid against the property & as the tnts couldn't possibly be affected by that; rule it an irrelevance.
Seem to be clutching at straws...until I read on.
As these tnts can actually knit lies & prove them I wasn't surprised to read they were claiming 'hardship'. 4 children, cant find another property, or a LL to take them [ due to 2 CCJ's but forgot to mention those].Do tell of HB/tax credits being stopped [ don't say because of 2 massive frauds on DWP]. They cite acute medical issues with their children [ theatrical, yet bogus]. They plead, beg to stay on in the property pleading to only be allowed [ allowed!] to pay rent including reducing the arrears. Their pleas were a two tissue job [ as per].
My question is...will the Court ignore all the above & rule purely on' was the S21 validly served'. The tnts agree they received all the vital docs so that in theory should be that.
I don't know, nor can discover what lee-way the Court has to consider other aspects...does anyone know of a website where I can find out the jurisdiction or perameters of the acc re-possession case All I've read seems to separate the S8 [ about arrears] from the S21 [ no blame possession]. The defence filed is a misnomer then or otherwise why not just ask if the validation docs were received?
I read somewhere that a Court can rule that the tnts are given more chances...where children are involved. These parasites told me exactly that in their last email.
Finally, if the parasites are given leeway & they break that agreement as well...do I have to serve another s21 & pay the Court fee of £355 again and begin from scratch. That's the information I can't get my hands on.
Help line returned a blank on my questions, so I'm turning to colleagues discover 'judges rules' on this common problem. Many thanks for relevant advice.
Want to read more?
This is a members only forum, if you want to read more you need to login to your membership, if you are not a member, click here to join.