January 2014 – A Wonderfully Successful Start to the New Year

Richard Moss Solicitors was instructed by four different clients to attend to four different Court hearings that all took place in the last two weeks in January 2014.

For the first hearing, Richard Moss was instructed by a landlord seeking to recover possession of his property. The tenant attempted to delay the inevitable by applying to Birmingham County Court to amend her Defence and to bring a Counterclaim against Richard’s landlord client. Richard appeared at Court and successfully opposed the tenant’s application.

For the second hearing, Richard Moss was instructed by another landlord seeking to recover possession of his property. The tenant attempted to defeat the possession claim brought by Richard’s landlord client by alleging she paid a tenancy deposit greater than that received and protected by the landlord. If Manchester County Court accepted the tenant’s allegation, the landlord would have been unable to recover possession of his property. That said, Richard’s involvement in this case resulted in the Court approving an order requiring the tenant to vacate the landlord’s  property by 10 February 2014.

For the third hearing, Richard Moss was instructed by another landlord seeking to recover possession of his property from a tenant in receipt of income support and housing benefit and who was represented by a law firm that was funded by legal aid. This immediately put Richard’s privately-paying landlord client at a cost disadvantage. That said, a strategy was agreed that would culminate in an application to Bury County Court to allocate the proceedings to the ‘Small Claims Track’ thereby stopping all further legal aid to the tenant which, in turn, would result in the tenant’s law firm ceasing to act. That strategy proved extremely effective because it led to Bury County Court ordering the tenant to vacate the landlord’s property by 3 March 2014.

As for the fourth hearing, that case was settled before the hearing actually took place and on terms agreed between Richard’s client and a housing association. The housing association had brought a claim against Richard’s client based on an allegation of anti-social behaviour. Unfortunately, the actions of Richard’s client had been recorded by a CCTV camera and that recording unfortunately meant Richard’s client had poor prospects of successfully opposing the housing association’s claim. It was for this reason the case was settled before the hearing.

On balance, Richard Moss Solicitors has had a very successful start to the New Year.

Comments