hmmm JR8, I hear you loud and clear. Usually when I get these letters from some lawyer, I am so incensed and my previous tenants were exactly like that. Each little requests, they would want a 50% rebate of rent. And when I finally managed to kick them out, they hung on to the keys for nearly an extra month and the managing agents were crap at recoveryJR8 wrote:Sorry to hear about your experience, attending court is a ghastly experience, even when you're sure that right is on your side. 'Cold and heartless' is the least of it, you have to be prepared for the other side to try and clinically completely destroy you. That IS how the adversarial legal system works.
If a case is dismissed, or 'thrown out', it can be for many reasons.
- Pre-trial procedures weren't followed.
- There isn't enough substantive evidence to proceed upon.
- There is no material virtue in proceeding (court time is expensive).
I don't think you can take a position that the judge was partial (biased against you). The judiciary, including lawyers, can be insufferably snobby about how learned, socially elevated and indispensable their services are. But on the flip-side I have seen a judge bend over backwards to accommodate people who cannot afford a lawyer and who are representing themselves.
Maybe the judge in your case believed your case was genuine but insubstantive and you posed a real risk (via a full hearing) of failing to find remedy AND getting costs awarded against you. I.e. have you considered that he was probably doing you a favour?
--- I have had a few of instances of tenants threatening me with legal action after I have made deductions for damages against their tenancy deposits. The scenario usually begins with a super-aggressive lawyers letter threatening terminal hellfire and damnation, and within it an outline of the ex-tenants perceived case. Once you have picked yourself up off the floor and calmed yourself down, you can go back and re-read it, and consider the allegations. What I have found is that most if not all allegations can simply be rebutted by fact and evidence*.
My point is that perceptions of right and wrong, and the worthiness of a case are far from black and white.
*Tenant - 'You said you'd provide us with a new microwave, but you never did!!'
Landlord - 'I wasn't obliged to as you took the flat 'as is' and only later did you request a new microwave. However I suggested (per my e-mail dd. xx/yy/zz attached) that I would do so if you agreed to a rent increase of £25/mo, and you never replied to that'.
Tenant - 'You've made a deduction for £250 for a burn mark on the bedroom carpet. I didn't do it and how could it cost so much!!!?'
Landlord - 'There was no burn mark when you moved in, but there was when you vacated, per the check-in/out Inventory and Condition Reports (attached) that you agreed and signed. There was no other possible remedy but to replace the whole carpet in that room. Here is a copy of the invoice from that work, carried out immediately after your departure. You'll see that the cost to me was £500, but I made a 50% allowance in consideration that the carpet was [say] 3 years old, i.e as a whole it was perhaps half-way through it's useful life'.
Tenant - 'You've made a deduction for repainting the bedroom. That's ridiculous, we painted it ourselves as it was SO scruffy, so if anything it was left in a better condition than to start with!'
Landlord - 'The bedroom was originally painted in Dulux Silk 'Orchid White', the same paint used throughout the rest of the flat. You took it upon yourself, without reference to me i.e. in breach of your Tenancy Agreement, to paint it an apparent black gloss containing luminous metallic purple flakes. [etc....]
And so on. Thankfully this kind of thing rarely happens, but now and again you do get a tenant who considers any deduction as grounds for total war. On that note my suggestion to landlords is, for any deduction made, ensure it is 'just and reasonable', and thoroughly evidenced. Before you apply any deduction to a deposit imagine having to stand up and justify it to a judge. No landlord wants legal action, but if you can show you have been reasonable, even accomodative, you have nothing to fear at all. I've only had one follow up to a lawyers opening salvo and my rebuttal, and that was where the tenants father was a lawyer, and he had paid her rent/deposit (!). Roughly 'This is your last chance to pay up, or we're proceeding against you', which I could confidently simply ignore (and nothing further came of it).
Not necessary. If something from legal point of view is obviously wrong I believe it may end up like this. Again, not knowing any details it is hard to guess.nanana wrote:oh by the way, the judge didn;t even give me a reason on why my case was dismissed.
He just left the room when i asked him.
I mean, even if i were to lose the case, at the very least, a judge should at least let both parties present their case in front of him?
If this was the case then no-one would litigate. No point !AndrewV wrote: institutions like CASE and the small courts tribunals are powerless entities without any enforcement capability
Each of those examples happened to me (and there are oh so many more lol), though I think that in fact the black metallic paint mentioned was '''merely''' dark purple gloss, so still like a satanic den of some kind!Primrose Hill wrote: hmmm JR8, I hear you loud and clear. Usually when I get these letters from some lawyer, I am so incensed and my previous tenants were exactly like that. Each little requests, they would want a 50% rebate of rent. And when I finally managed to kick them out, they hung on to the keys for nearly an extra month and the managing agents were crap at recovery
I meant meaningless because we have no context to know if the decision made was appropriate or not. Not meaningless like I don't care what happened to you. Sorry if it came across like that.nanana wrote:oh by the way, the judge didn;t even give me a reason on why my case was dismissed.
He just left the room when i asked him.
I mean, even if i were to lose the case, at the very least, a judge should at least let both parties present their case in front of him?
@zzm9980: meaningless to you...but it was great deal that i had to go through. i was just sharing my experience that the system can be cold and heartless.
1) Vital. Back home a landlord usually pays for the inventory 'check-in', and the tenant pays for the 'check-out' (or vice versa, I forget now). But it's usually called an 'Inventory and condition report'. The overall cost isn't that much, in London a professional inventory clerk may be £100 each/side for a comprehensive job together with photos. There is a lot that can go wrong damage-wise, and there are many things a tenant can seek to hide or claim 'was damaged/was already like that etc*100' when they moved in. Having it documented avoids any doubt. Inventory clerks know precisely every nook and cranny to inspect and document. Things an average landlord or tenant might not have even thought of. And both sides regard them as impartial arbiters. The first time you have a place thrashed (i.e. c1/2 trashed) you will be relieved you had a proper inventory drawn up and signed at the outset.martincymru wrote:JR8:
1. what's your opinion of inventories
2. ditto pre tenancy pre condition survey by Surveyor.
This post is going off track !
There is always an area that could be disputed and I think one very common in Singapore is about what could be considered fair wear and tear.JR8 wrote:1) Vital. [..]Inventory clerks know precisely every nook and cranny to inspect and document. Things an average landlord or tenant might not have even thought of. And both sides regard them as impartial arbiters. The first time you have a place thrashed (i.e. c1/2 trashed) you will be relieved you had a proper inventory drawn up and signed at the outset.martincymru wrote:JR8:
1. what's your opinion of inventories
2. ditto pre tenancy pre condition survey by Surveyor.
This post is going off track !
Exactly, JR8. They indeed completely destroyed me clinically, psychologically.Primrose Hill wrote:JR8 wrote:Sorry to hear about your experience, attending court is a ghastly experience, even when you're sure that right is on your side. 'Cold and heartless' is the least of it, you have to be prepared for the other side to try and clinically completely destroy you. That IS how the adversarial legal system works.
Was wondering when somebody was going to suggest that! Somebody give us some Friday dates......nanana wrote:
argh! SMS! when is the next round of gathering? really makes my blood boil when i think of it. need some beer too cool down!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests