Trespasser Advice

[settloe_99]

We have a property which we let to a tenant on HB with a g/tour about a year ago.

The HB stopped last month and upon speaking to the tenant we have now found out that he has moved out and let his 17 year old ex girlfriend move in who has put a claim in for HB from there. We have told him she is not the tenant and can not live there and therefore she must move out.

She has been to the council however and they have called us to say she has rights as a trespasser and we must serve her with a trespassers notice and take her to court if we want the property back.

Any advice on where we stand with this would be appreciated.

Thanks

[Worldlife]

Whilst awaiting the advice from someone with experience of this particular problem it might be worthwhile reading LandlordZONE article on Squatters etc (http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/squatters.htm)

A key to the procedures to adopt here may be in the sequence of events. If the original tenant handed the keys over and created a sub-tenancy then I believe different procedures would have to be adopted to those for squats or trespassers.

[jeffrey]

Whilst awaiting the advice from someone with experience of this particular problem it might be worthwhile reading LandlordZONE article on Squatters etc (http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/squatters.htm)

A key to the procedures to adopt here may be in the sequence of events. If the original tenant handed the keys over and created a sub-tenancy then I believe different procedures would have to be adopted to those for squats or trespassers.

I just came across this thread.

Note that a 17-year-old cannot be a tenant in any case. In fact, to hold a tenancy, or any legal estate or interest, one must be 18 or over.

Moreover, a contract (of any type and relating to anything at all) into which an under-18 enters is usually unenforceable. Exception: 'contract for necessaries', such as food.

A recent case of mine involved a client's daughter (aged 16) who signed-up for a moble telephone contract. She fell into arrears, O2 threatened to sue, and I had to write in stern terms to O2 explaining that the daughter was not legally liable to pay. Despite tennagers' fond belief, a mobile telphone is not a 'necessary'!