- Adverse possession(16)
- Community care(62)
- Housing law – All(1300)
- Mortgage possession(62)
- Tolerated trespasser(49)
- Trusts and Estoppel(42)
- Various (non-housing)(439)
- Giles Peaker on Make do and mend: Undoing Superstrike on deposits
- William Noad on Make do and mend: Undoing Superstrike on deposits
- DavBag on Reforming a bad policy, badly.
- Bill Heywood on Reforming a bad policy, badly.
- CJ on Trouble out west
- Giles Peaker on Reforming a bad policy, badly.
- Joy Boyd on Reforming a bad policy, badly.
- Debbie on Reforming a bad policy, badly.
- J on Three to whet your appetite
- At Last, some Relief from Sanctions | Coventry View on Mitchell-Game, Set and Match?
Visits in 2014279559
According to this article, the Residential Landlords Association are up in arms about the European Court of Human Rights being about to rule on article 8 defences in a case affecting private land owners. Richard Jones, the RLA policy director (and a solicitor who some might think should really know better) is quoted as saying:
“If Europe decides that respect for the home provisions within the Human Rights Convention apply to private landlords this will lead to a mass exodus of landlords, causing untold misery for those in desperate need of a place to live.”
There are a few problems with that statement, but perhaps the most immediate one … Read the full post
A report of a County Court mortgage possession case has reached us, in which the secured lender’s behaviour resulted in a finding of abuse of process. The question was when (an if) an arrears payment had been received.
Blemain Finance Ltd v Andrea Jayne Ridley Darlington County Court 21 June 2012
Ms Ridley was the homeowner, with a mortgage of £44,000 (£39,000 outstanding) from 1999. She took out a further secured loan for £20,000 with Blemain Finance in 2006. She had fallen into arrears on payments and Blemain had obtained a possession order in 2006, then a warrant, which Blemain didn’t enforce on payment of the arrears. When arrears of … Read the full post
This case revolves around the question of whether a review under s129 Housing Act 1996 does or doesn’t uphold the original decision to serve a notice. In particular, when the decision may state that the service of the notice is upheld but then sets out conditions as to the circumstances in which the LL (LA or PRP) will not issue the possession proceedings. This seems to be a common occurrence. The trouble comes, as in this case, when the LL then decides that those conditions are not being or have not been met and issues the possession proceedings anyway. The … Read the full post
In the Summer Dave and David Smith posted about the case of Kinnear v Whittaker in the High Court. Bean J allowed an appeal against the summary disposal of a possession claim where the defendant had raised proprietary estoppel as a defence. This interesting and important question about the interaction between estoppel and s.2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 was therefore put off until trial.
The claimants appear to have been too excited to wait until then (or, more likely, but less poetically, they wanted to avoid the expense of a trial) and so appealed to the Court of Appeal. On Wednesday Stanley Burnton LJ refused … Read the full post
Webb and another v Marcos and another CA, July 8, 2011 (lawtel and westlaw notes only) looks like a sad tale, as well as being one of those (hopefully rare) cases where a possession order was enforced by committal.
M was the occupier of a property which had been bought by W. Possession proceedings were issued and W obtained an order for possession. M was refused permission to appeal. When M failed to leave the property, a judge attached a penal notice to the possession order. M still refused to leave and was sentenced to 14 days imprisonment (suspended to allow social services to investigate). M then appealed the committal … Read the full post