URGENT LEGAL HELP REQUIRED ...plz advise.

[Nazma]

Hi everyone... I am new on here and have an urgent urgent legal query. I would be grateful for your response. I do not work in this legal area and therefore, am unable to help.

 

My cousin is the owner of a business. He has a Contract with the landlord for 5 years,signed and dated from December 2006. Contact exists between the parties. Cousin decided to sell the shop and as such, had not paid the rent for the last 2-3 months. Advised the landlord that as soon as the shop was sold, he would be paying him. ( Tried to contact the landlord yesterday to bring the rent payments upto date but was not able to)

 

Landlord was informed of this 2 weeks ago and agreed that he was content for the shop to be sold to the buyer. Wanted to meet the person. Cousin sells the business to another person- keys provided to shop after deposit given but awaiting payment and arranging for contract to be transferred.

 

In the meantime, landlord allows another 3rd party (who also was a potential buyer for the shop but offered less and therefore cousin did not sell him) to pay him one months rent but does not give him a contract. This 3rd party breaks one of the front locks to get into the shop and begins his work. He damages the fridges, ( cost around 7k total and dismantles the shelving units (costing 2k) and places a huge amount of stock inside the shop. My cousin had just bought a new counter, which has been dismantled into three parts. Till disappeared.

 

My cousin was horrifed to find this out today and approached the Landlord who basically said he had been advised by his solicitor that it would be ok for him to give the shop to someone else but he had not as of yet given him a contract. My cousin queried as to why he had been given one months notice of termination and the landlord said that he was not required to. My cousin paid him the rent and the landlord took the payment. Said that he would speak to the 3rd party on Monday.

 

Cousin approached the shop where he was horrified to see it in such a state. Asked the 3rd party to leave who suddenly closed the shop doors and the shutters and said that it was now his shop. Cousin showed him the draft contract and said that he had trespassed and interfered with his goods. 3rd party took off in a rush.

 

Cousin approached me today for advice. Asking whether an action can be pursued as he fears that his goods are completely damaged and his agreement with the buyer will not go ahead.

 

Can anyone what options he has and what action he should now take?

Any standard letters that can be forwarded to me?

 

Many thanks

[Bigmac versus]

Sorry i cant offer legal advice on this but the contract your cousin has should shed some light on this.

Even if the landlord has permission to allow the 3rd party to take over the lease they do not have permission to damage goods which belong to your cousin, notice should be given to allow your cousin to remove belongings i would have thought.

[Bigmac versus]

After looking at this again is this not a case of theft, and damage to your goods they have actually broken into the shop, you have the lease/contract, i would contact the Police.

[Nazma]

Thank you for your help. My cousin was about to contact the Police yesterday when the person who has stored his goods in the shop and damaged my cousin's shelving units ran off in his car. We went to speak to him today and we both have a meeting with the Landlord tomorrow at 10am. He is saying that the landlord damaged the goods and vice versa. Also, the locks have all been changed so we cant get in.

 

Is he on the backfoot as he has not paid the rent ( which will be paid in full tomorrow)

 

Do you think it would be wise for me to advise him to contact the police tomorrow .

[tomterm8]

can I suggest going to your local citizens advice bureau, and finding out the name of a local soliciter? Many of them give out short consultations for free.

 

My instinct is that without an eviction notice from the court, what the landlord is doing is probably unlawful AND if someone damaged the goods, they are liable both criminally and for civil damages.

[Nazma]

Many thanks for your help. I think it is best to contact the CAB.

 

I have been told by someone else that the Landlord is right as the new party is a tenant at will and has paid rent, therefore has every right to be there.

 

I disagree - the fact that the Landlord has accpeted rent payments from my cousin means that the agreement continues. The new party has not signed up to a new contract.

My cousin has sold the shop with the consent of the Landlord. I think he has acted foolishly. Someone has said that my cousin's options are very limited in that he breached his obligations to the Landlord ( which have now be dealt with) and therefore the new party has the lease. ALl my cousin has is the goodwill of the business and his chattels.

 

What is your view on the above?

[tomterm8]

The problem is, as he is running a business and it's not a normal situation, I can't be sure enough to give you accurate advice. Especially as the contract is likely to be the key to answering your questions.

 

That was the reason I suggested a soliciter.

 

Business Debt Line might also be able to help.

 

I believe they almost certainly need to give you a notice before evicting you... but I can't be sure. Business law is not my aspect of law, and contract law is notoriously difficult.

 

Your case is so complicated you cousin MUST see a soliciter, even the advisor at CAB isn't going to be qualified to deal effectively with a case of this nature.

 

You certainly can't rely on advice over the internet in this case.

[Goldlady]

I think if it is at all possible your cousin should get a solicitor to accompany him tomorrow. Or at the very least take a witness along.

[Nazma]

thanks, I will be going along with him. I am a member of the legal profession but not in this field. Many thanks for all your help.

[Guest littlesally]

Could a mod maybe move this thread to where ever it should go now please

 

Sally x

 

PS Sorry, all the best Nazma. This sounds all wrong and I don't understand the way some peoples minds work!

[Bigmac versus]

Nazma remember to let us know of any progress.

Hope all goes well

[tomterm8]

Yeah.

 

I wish you well - wish I could help more.

[Bigmac versus]

Thread moved from Welcome forum, unfortunately there isnt an exact location for this so have placed in residential lettings under tenants.

[Nazma]

sorry i am new here and i didnt know where to post it? thanks for all of your support. Its a really sticky situation to be in and I cant help but feel for my cousin. I think that is why I am finding it hard to see both sides. However, alot of people are saying to me it is my cousin who is at fault but everyone on this site has been very supportive! thanks very much.

 

I will let you know how it goes. Meeting at 10 am tomorrow with the LL and with the other party.

[Nazma]

oh and I forgot to add. As it has been pointed out, this case is complicated. I have spoken to my cousin who said that if the matter can be resolved without legal intervention, then he would rather go down this route- at least at the outset. I have drafted a letter for him and have voiced his concerns so that at least LL is aware that we are taking the matter seriously. Sometimes, a letter is all that is needed and in other cases, one has to proceed.

 

I will keep you all posted!

[MrShed]

I think there is some confusion here. It is very important not to think that ANY of the residential letting laws apply - they do not. There is no court order required, and there is no criminal act - only a potential civil breach.

 

There really is only one important question here. What does the contract say regarding reclaiming possession of the property?

[Guest littlesally]

Has your cousin been to Shelter? They are very good with housing type things and may be able to help. They have solicitors as well as advice.

Maybe I am mis-reading this but I can't see how your cousin is in the wrong - but then I am not knowledgable about this type of thing.

Sally

[tomterm8]

Has your cousin been to Shelter? They are very good with housing type things and may be able to help. They have solicitors as well as advice.

Maybe I am mis-reading this but I can't see how your cousin is in the wrong - but then I am not knowledgable about this type of thing.

Sally

 

i thought shelter only does domestic type problems? the cousin is talking about a business rent.

 

MrShed think the criminal element people are seeing in this is related to the disappearence of his property, and damage to other goods. NOT, as such, the decision by the landlord to evict etc.

[MrShed]

Oh tom dont get me wrong, I see the reasoning, it is just flawed. There is no theft, as theft is the dishonest misappropriation of property - this clearly was not that. I would very much doubt the criminal damage laws would apply, as there was no intent here, clearly. That does not mean that there is not entitlement for recompense - there clearly is. However, that is a civil issue, not a criminal one.

 

RE Shelter, you are right - they are useless in this situation. It isnt actually as complex(the main question that is not the side issues) as it appears to be - commercial tenancies are almost 100% governed by the commercial tenancy contract - hence why my question asked above is so important.

[Guest littlesally]

Not sure Tom, but may be worth ringing them to find out. That's what I meant by 'they are good with housing type stuff' I should've added 'so they may know about this situation'

They also may know who can help if they can't.

Sally x

[Bigmac versus]

Great advice being given now and hopefully you will get this situation resolved, this isnt an area im experienced in but surely if the till is missing then someone has took it and without permission, isnt this theft?

Maybe the contract says you have so much time to remove your property and you have failed to act in this time, but anything else i would say would be theft.

[MrShed]

Bigmac - you'd be surprised, but it is not. The property has to be "dishonestly appropriated". In this situation, it could(and probably would) be argued that the property was genuinely thought abandoned, and was therefore being disposed of.

[Bigmac versus]

Unbelievable that one MrShed, every days like a school day thats what makes this site so good.

 

Cant get my head round that one, surely for someone to claim they thought it was abandoned they would need a reason for thinking this such as what? They knew in this case that the OP was selling the business to another party, so that would make it "dishonestly appropriated"

[MrShed]

Well this is obviously the realms of a solicitor

 

But as a layman:

 

- Mr X rents a property from Mr Y

- Mr Z then rents the property from Mr Y

- Mr Z moves into the property

 

Z does not necessarily have any idea of Mr Xs position in the matter, or indeed is even aware of him existing.

[MrShed]

Just as a point of interest, here is the full definition of "theft":

 

Theft - Definition of Theft

The Theft Act 1968 Section1 (1) states that a person is guilty of theft if: he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.

 

I myself was surprised mac. However, the more you think about it the more it makes sense, for exactly this type of reason.If you did not define it in this manner, you could find property that has been abandoned for 5 years, and then face a theft charge.

 

It is REALLY important to stress that just because it is not "theft", does NOT mean that a civil case cannot be brought successfully to be reimbursed for the financial loss caused.