Call us on 0845 620 0013
or send us an email

Before our landlord client instructed us to act his behalf, he instructed a firm of unregulated, non-lawyers claiming to offer ‘specialist landlord support services’. Our client paid money to that firm for it to issue a section 21 notice and then begin proceedings for a possession order and payment of rent arrears.

The tenant defended the proceedings on the ground that the landlord’s section 21 notice was invalid. Furthermore, the tenant made a counterclaim for housing disrepair.

However, the tenant failed to comply with the Court’s orders and procedural rules and so the Court struck out the tenant’s Defence and Counterclaim. Richard Moss Solicitors was instructed shortly after the tenant applied to the Court for her Defence and Counterclaim to be reinstated.

At a hearing in Birmingham County Court on 4 March 2013, Richard Moss successfully opposed the tenant’s application for her Defence and Counterclaim to be reinstated. Further, Richard Moss successfully obtained an order that the tenant pays all rent arrears. Even further, Richard Moss successfully obtained an order that the tenant pays his client’s legal costs.

However, the Court refused to grant a possession order because the section 21 notice was invalid. In the circumstances, Richard Moss has been instructed to issue a fresh section 21 notice and then begin possession proceedings all over again. (Richard has also been instructed to bring a compensation claim against the firm that negligently prepared the invalid section 21 notice).

The obvious lesson to be learned by landlords is not to instruct a firm of unregulated, non-lawyers. (By way of analogy, would you hire a taxi driver knowing that he had neither a driving licence nor motor insurance?).

Success in Cold & Wintry Halifax

Richard Moss Solicitors was instructed to act for the owner of a commercial unit who found himself in a disagreement with his neighbour regarding the precise location of the boundary dividing their respective properties.

The neighbour issued proceedings against the client. The Court-appointed, joint surveyor prepared a report stating the boundary was exactly where the client said it was. Obviously, the neighbour was unhappy with the joint surveyor’s report so he applied to the Court for permission to rely on his own surveyor who, unsurprisingly, took a different view.

The neighbour’s application was heard on a cold and wintry day in Halifax County Court on 23 January 2013. Richard Moss advocated against the neighbour’s barrister. The Court agreed with Richard’s submissions and refused to allow the neighbour to rely on his own surveyor.

This result means that only the Court-appointed, joint surveyor’s opinion will be taken into consideration by the judge at trial which provides the client with a significant evidential advantage.


Richard Moss Solicitors was instructed on 30 November 2012 to help a residential landlord defend his tenant’s housing disrepair claim. The instructions were received extremely late because a two-day trial had already been listed for 10 and 11 December 2012.

The landlord’s defence was heavily dependent on his surveyor’s evidence but the landlord did not have the Court’s permission to rely on it at trial so Richard Moss quickly arranged a Court hearing for 5 December 2012 so that his landlord client could ask for the Court’s permission.

At the hearing, Richard Moss advocated against the tenant’s barrister who argued that permission should not be granted. Richard Moss won the argument. Even more, Richard Moss went on to persuade the Court that the trial should be adjourned to March 2013 at the earliest so that he, and his landlord client, would have a proper opportunity to prepare for trial.

This was an excellent result that the client was absolutely delighted with.

Richard Moss Solicitors represented its first client at a trial within its first six months of practice.

The client was defending a claim brought by a recruitment consultant called Red Pepper Recruitment. The trial took place on 9 August 2012 in Manchester County Court and the Judge was persuaded that the client was not liable to pay the money claimed by the recruitment consultant.

This result extends Richard Moss’ phenomenal track record for achieving successful outcomes for his clients at trial.

The Manchester Evening News took a keen interest in Richard Moss Solicitors and, on 2 August 2012, it published an interesting article that briefly touched upon some of the reasons why Richard Moss set up a niche law firm specialising in business-related disputes and property-related disputes.

The MEN’s article can be found here.