Guarantor & HB

[L8r]

The guarantor who previously tried to deny responsibility has phoned to discuss.

He is a reasonable guy and I sympathise with his predicament. He accepts verbally that he is guarantor and the many emails, I believe, demonstrate his continued awareness and concern at being so.

From the previous thread (sorry can't post the ink) I do accept the risk that the end result may be less favourable to me. A situation of deed will not be created now, so I intend to proceed on the basis that I am able to hold him to the responsibility.

It is clear the tenant, on HB, is now enjoying her increased revenue. As she is 2 months + in arrears I may request HB direct, also he may try to cause her to arrange this (less likely).

A concern is that when the LL accepts HB he enters into a contract with the DSS. This contract is outside the previous agreement with the guarantor.
Would the guarantor be released from his responsibilities from this time?

The last email from the tenant expressed discontent that I have discussed her personal affairs with 'others'. I have, clearly, communicated the ongoing situation with the guarantor, as he should be made aware of this. I believe this to be correct. If he divulges this to 'others' I don't see I have responsibility.

As the tenant is now making the most of the situation, and I am now aware she is influenced by some that are aware of 'scams', I become concerned of the possibility of the 'professional tenant' game.
What possibility of success should the tenant claim my communications have effected her right to 'quite enjoyment', effectively becoming harassment?

[westminster]

Here is the thread; see posts as from #10.

http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=26647

[johnboy]

A landlord doesnt normally enter into a contract with the council. There may be a agreement regarding the council deposit bond if it was used and if the landlord accepted the rent directly from the council they could be able to claim it back if the tenant wasnt intitled to it.

[westminster]

Would the guarantor be released from his responsibilities from this time?
You receiving HB direct from the council instead of paid to the tenant does not release either guarantor or tenant from their liability for any debt.

But as pointed out on the other thread, there was no deed of guarantee, so the so-called guarantor is not legally liable.


The last email from the tenant expressed discontent that I have discussed her personal affairs with 'others'. I have, clearly, communicated the ongoing situation with the guarantor, as he should be made aware of this. I believe this to be correct. If he divulges this to 'others' I don't see I have responsibility....
What possibility of success should the tenant claim my communications have effected her right to 'quite enjoyment', effectively becoming harassment?
You mean quiet enjoyment.

Read the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 (link here (http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=All+Legislation&searchEnacted=0&extentMatchOnly=0&confersPower=0&blanketAmendment=0&sortAlpha=0&PageNumber=0&NavFrom=0&parentActiveTextDocId=1499483&ActiveTextDocId=1499483&filesize=103706)), which describes what constitutes illegal eviction/harassment. In essence, the landlord's actions must be "likely to interfere with the peace or comfort of the residential occupier" and the landlord must know or believe that his "conduct is likely to cause the residential occupier to give up the occupation of the whole or part of the premises". Both must apply in order to constitute an offence.

Only you know the full details of the situation so I cannot tell you more than that. But generally, the illegal harassment cases I have read about concern things such as cutting off the gas, entering and removing the T's belongings, threats or acts of physical violence, verbal abuse, etc.

[L8r]

Thanks for the link.
It reassures me that I am still a good boy, in the eyes of the law, without the corrupting of lies at least.

Frustrating as these situations may be resorting to such acts of harassment aren't worth the possible result.