In need of advice

[bouncingback]

Hi a friend of mine lost his job as school site agent, this included losing his home aswell. He handed back the keys and left the property in better condition than when he moved in. The school recepitionist rung him several times last week asking him questions as to where the carpets went and several other stupid questions. Now the place was in need of severe repairs, ie very damp and wiring was dangerous. This had been logged back to 01 but still repairs wasn't done. So the carpets were replaced with wood flooring due to getting damp and going mouldy as was several pieces of furniture. They were replaced with my friends own money and were left as replacements.

Am I right in thinking that the school receptionist has nothing to do with the property what so ever, its the council that own the property.Does he have the right to tell her to stop ringing him and all correspondse should be through letters only. After all her job is school receptionist so she shouldn't be harrassing him, thats not her job discription.

[MrShed]

Did he have the property as a licensee or as a tenant?

[bouncingback]

A tenant.

[MrShed]

So just to absolutely confirm, the property was not provided SOLELY as part of the job, and rent is paid to the council, and a totally seperate TENANCY agreement was signed?

[bouncingback]

The rent was taken out of his wages and yes he signed a separate tenacy agreement.

[MrShed]

OK....in that case, why did he leave? If he was a tenant, he had an absolute right to remain following the termination of employment.

 

Who is the landlord as declared upon the tenancy agreement?

[bouncingback]

county council owns the property and after losing his job he had to vacant his home aswell. (its on school site) so as he wasnt employed anymore by them he HAD to give the house up to. The house came with the job.

Edited February 8, 2009 by bouncingback

[bouncingback]

He was given something like 56 days to leave or it would of gone to court.

[MrShed]

county council owns the property and after losing his job he had to vacant his home aswell. (its on school site) so as he wasnt employed anymore by them he HAD to give the house up to.

 

Which makes him a licensee, NOT a tenant.

[bouncingback]

oops does it sorry, like i said i'm asking for a friend. He only wanted to know does the school receptionist have the right to keep ringing him over matters concerning the house, surely that would be up to the head teacher or the council to do and not her.

[MrShed]

There is no legal difference between the receptionist and the head in this case. For example, if you had a similar situation with a housing association property, you would not expect the CEO of the HA to call would you? It would be an employee.

 

Short answer is - yes, the receptionist can quite legitimately be the one to deal with this. However, she cannot harrass, which I believe would be more than two telephone calls a day, just as anyone else cannot harrass.

[bouncingback]

Thank you for taking the time to reply, she is indeed harrassing him he had 3 calls on Thursday and that was just in the two hours he was at my house. So would I be right in saying that he can tell her to stop the calls and put things in writing in the future.

[ajax95]

Would there have been anything to stop him from replacing anything in the house? Or did somebody at the school need to be infiormed before he did it?

 

That might possibly be a reason why she's on your friend's case...

Edited February 8, 2009 by ajax95
amendment

[MrShed]

You can ask, but I do not believe (await correction) that you can enforce written communication only. You can however enforce via the police that the calls are kept below the threshold of what is considered harrassment.

[bouncingback]

when he moved in there was a carpet in the frontroom and 2 bedrooms, and a wardrobe. The house is a flatroofed single brick house so like a garage really. The house is covered in damp was reported since 01 no repairs were ever carried out despite several letters complaining bout the state of the property. Over time he had decorated several times but the damp continued and ruined the frontroom carpet he replaced this with woodflooring, the same with the bedrooms. the wardrobe was replaced with a modern double one which he left as he did the flooring. No he didnt need to tell anyone as he was improving the house to make the conditions more liveable.

[MrShed]

Thats not entirely true I'm afraid. as a licencee, he had no right to modify the property, or its fittings, without the explicit authorisation of the owner.

 

However, it would be churlish of the owner to push matters that bettered the property - i.e. fixing of damp. However, new decor, even if the condition of the actual fittings was better, can be fully justified to be changed back at your friends cost - decor and fittings are very much one persons opinion, and the owners are entitled to have these as supplied.

[bouncingback]

You can ask, but I do not believe (await correction) that you can enforce written communication only. You can however enforce via the police that the calls are kept below the threshold of what is considered harrassment.

 

 

The keys were handed back before time and the property was left in better condition that what he got it in, thats why he doesn't understand why she is phoning all the time asking where the carpets have gone etc, surely having woodflooring replace the carpets because of the damp problem is better than having mouldy carpets.Which they would have to replace anyway for the next site agent.

[ajax95]

when he moved in there was a carpet in the frontroom and 2 bedrooms, and a wardrobe. The house is a flatroofed single brick house so like a garage really. The house is covered in damp was reported since 01 no repairs were ever carried out despite several letters complaining bout the state of the property. Over time he had decorated several times but the damp continued and ruined the frontroom carpet he replaced this with woodflooring, the same with the bedrooms. the wardrobe was replaced with a modern double one which he left as he did the flooring. No he didnt need to tell anyone as he was improving the house to make the conditions more liveable.

 

So exactly what reason has the receptionist been giving your friend for ringing him?

 

Thats not entirely true I'm afraid. as a licencee, he had no right to modify the property, or its fittings, without the explicit authorisation of the owner.

 

However, it would be churlish of the owner to push matters that bettered the property - i.e. fixing of damp. However, new decor, even if the condition of the actual fittings was better, can be fully justified to be changed back at your friends cost - decor and fittings are very much one persons opinion, and the owners are entitled to have these as supplied.

 

With the above in mind, are they trying to argue that he had to tell them?

Edited February 8, 2009 by ajax95
amendments

[MrShed]

Are they trying to argue that he had to tell them?

 

Which he did.

[bouncingback]

Thats not entirely true I'm afraid. as a licencee, he had no right to modify the property, or its fittings, without the explicit authorisation of the owner.

 

However, it would be churlish of the owner to push matters that bettered the property - i.e. fixing of damp. However, new decor, even if the condition of the actual fittings was better, can be fully justified to be changed back at your friends cost - decor and fittings are very much one persons opinion, and the owners are entitled to have these as supplied.

 

The old head teacher knew about the flooring and decor she gave the go ahead. The funny thing about all this is they seem to be nit picking because he heard a rumour from a teacher that they want to knock the house down for carparking space!! The new head that seems to be causing all this trouble seems to have it in for my friend as GET THIS her husband has got the job as site agent.... go figure!!! and he won't be living on site.

[MrShed]

OK so...what exactly ARE they ringing for?

[bouncingback]

They want to know where the carpets are for the frontroom and 2 of the bedrooms. Although they should know of the bad damp problem and why the carpets were replaced by woodflooring.My friend has explained several times if the damp problems were resolved 9 years ago when first reported maybe the carpets would still be there.

[ajax95]

Are the school threatening your friend with any kind of action?

 

Seeing as your friend has explained what happened to the furniture and carpets he replaced that's the only logical reason I can think of for ringing him as often as they are...

Edited February 9, 2009 by ajax95
typos/amendments

[ajax95]

bump