I was wondering about this actually... in my case I signed the contract for O2 not even a month ago and now get an email from them saying they are putting up the price in their annual price rise. I can understand the logic of putting up prices for those who have been with them for a year but my contract isn't even a month old! I also note that O2 is required to notify you of the price increases. They have only mentioned in the email ONE price increase, not all the price increases. Does this give wriggle-room?

I don't mind them doing work to the outside of the house, I don't mind scaffolding, I do mind that we weren't asked, that the scaffolding blocks the entrance, work beyond the allowed hours, that they entered the flat without permission and then started using *our* electricity. The amazing thing is the justification is the landlord told them to. Police will be speaking to the landlord... the builders were under the impression that they had permission to enter. Seems the landlord likes porkies.

I also had someone from the council come round yesterday to take a statement about the noise the previous day... today the work started at 7am... banging on the bedroom window. I work nights right now. I have reported them to the council again about this - the council say the time to work is 8pm till 6pm. Apparently the builders have to move the scaffolding too as it blocks the entrance, not just any entrance but the main fire exit! Putting things to the landlord in writing won't help with the fact we are moving on the 14th. He has a minimum of 14 days to respond to a letter before claim.

It gets worse. I came downstairs this morning and found the front door open and the builders had plugged their tools into the power sockets and were drawing power to carry out work! I immediately unplugged their tools, shut the door, and called the police to report someone had entered the property without permission and I feared if they did not attend there would be a breach of the peace. The police have attended, spoken to me, taken notes, and the builders are now gone insisting it's all the fault of the landlord.

Sullivan v Bristol Film Studios 2012 is the case you want for this. Cases can be struck out if the cost of pursuing them is disproportionate to the claim itself - that is if they are on the wrong track. You might also want to check out Dow Jones & Co Inc v Jameel 2005. It is therefore easy to move any claim to the small claims track if you know what to do and the sum you are claiming is under the small claims limit. The relevant part of the CPR is 26.1. http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part26#IDA1ZLTC

Er... and we will get the sofas out how? There isn't the space because the scaffolding blocks it. The parking has been taken up by scaffolding that would be used by a removal van etc etc...

Scaffolding has already been up on one side of the building for literally months - five and counting and no work done. I asked the builders when work was scheduled and they said there was none but that the outside would eventually be painted! The LL is aware we are moving on the 14th and today we have scaffolding put up outside that partially blocks access to the front of the building and stops us from moving out furniture. There was no notification or anything, the first thing I knew was when I walked into my kitchen naked and saw a builder staring back at me. We have no intention of stopping the landlord, simply wondering if this is gaining entry to the property without permission. It blocks access though, wheelie bins are actually trapped by scaffolding now, and parking is blocked too.

Thanks. I've called Environmental Health as they are still putting up the scaffolding. They actually have a young child helping them four storeys up!

Well our wonderful landlord has decided to have scaffolding put up on the front of the property without bothering to notify anyone. The scaffolding is well over the property line here. Now landlords and their agents are not allowed to enter property without permission... does this include the boundary line? Ie... could a landlord sit around in your front garden without permission or does he only need permission to enter the actual abode?

We fired off a formal letter before claim today, one that naturally corresponds perfectly with the Civil Procedure Rules. We are seeking damages for failing to insure the deposit under the deposit protection scheme AND recission of the contract, or in the alternative further damages for negligent misrepresentation under statute due to the small fact the contract bangs on about the DPS and we aren't protected by it. I feel quite clever... two bites of the cherry, one for violating the DPS and one for breaching contract law. As far as the damp goes there's this useful case. http://www.letlink.co.uk/case-law/disrepair/lloyd-v-rees-divisional-court-1996.html

And just to bump this up. Health and Safety visited on Friday afternoon. None of the gas in the flat has been checked since 2003!!! Due to failing to check the gas appliances for nine years the guy who visited (along with a gas engineer) said he expects they'll be taking legal action against the landlord. He also said faulty fire alarm is unsafe, along with the exterior door for the building which cannot be opened without a key. They will be ordering the landlord to immediately replace the fire alarm and as there is no fire escape the exterior door. If he does not do so immediately there will be further action taken. Health and Safety were not impressed that the fire alarm had supposedly passed checks, and yet was faulty - that is although it goes off when there is smoke it also goes off when there isn't.

As an example, you would change this... "Section 10 (11) of the Landlord and Tenant Act (1985) specifies the statutory obligations landlords are bound by for repairing their properties let to tenants on short leases. This includes to keep in repair sanitary conveniences. From the beginning of the period of the lease, the Landlord has failed in these obligation of keeping the family bathroom in the required state due to the failure to repair water leaks that flooded electrical lighting below." You should state the precise breaches of law exhaustively and use case law wherever possible. Do you realise that according to Section 10 of the Landlord and Tenant Act the house would be legally unfit for habitation if you listed everything wrong with it? Go through this list and tick off every thing that was wrong with it at the same time. No matter what though, you withheld rent so the law is against you, although the behaviour of the landlord may affect the matter of damages and costs.

Thanks. Well just to give you a heads up we have no intention of withholding any rent. Our intention is to keep paying the rent as contractually obliged and seek damages for loss of amenity, and for the failures to stick to the deposit protection scheme. To be honest the intention is that we use these damages to then cover the rent we will be paying because the landlord won't let us leave. At the same time we are going to force the repair of the damp in the apartment as he is legally required to do. The lowest quote we have had so far is £15,000, it's THAT extensive! Let's not even get started on the misrepresentation that occurred when the property was marketed, had it not been misrepresented we'd never had signed up for it. That'll be for another case if he still doesn't get the message. I should add I have quite a lot of legal experience, but that's intellectual property which is rather different to this. The phrase used in this thread however "loss of amenity" has told me where to actually look as I wasn't sure what sort of case law there was. Balii isn't very good for searching blindly on. Anyway we intend on using March & Parrish v. Leslie (1994) to bludgeon the landlord. I'll keep this thread updated.

How does that cover for example three months loss of amenity for the inability to use the bathroom properly? Rent is paid on a monthly basis... if we can't use the bathroom properly there is a loss of amenity for that particular month. March and Parrish v Leslie (1994) seems to say that you can claim on a monthly basis, NOT at the end of the tenancy. There isn't a break clause. We've actually tried to break and the landlord has been refusing to readvertise the property whilst at the same time refusing to carry out work he's legally required to do on the basis of cost. He also refused to give us references as we were currently his tenants (that was his actual excuse) - we have got somewhere else and will be moving there with this as our second home. Our new landlord was quite pleased with his inability to give us a reference as it was actually a compliment. Oh well time to do a proper Letter Before Claim.

Penetrating damp... the entire building is infested with damp actually. We didn't call environmental health by the way, someone else reported it. The couple in the flat downstairs own the leasehold but the landlord owns the freehold. He has been refusing to do any work at all to the communal areas of the flat and they are gradually degrading in quality. We're talking plaster falling away from the walls, the carpet worn to the bone over the stairs and things like that. The plumber came around, the bath does move. We aren't allowed to repair these things you know. It states that in our contract very clearly. We've been told the entire bath needs replacing with a new one. The landlord is refusing to do it on the basis of cost. It's landlord owned... along with the gas heating system. No, it isn't. See post one. It says on the contract it is, but it hasn't actually been put in anything and we don't have the paperwork for it! In other words the LL is pretending it is... we only found out on Sunday. How do we go about making a claim for the deposit protection? I found this - So it seems we should try and force repair AND sue for damages.