Locks been changed on our rented spannering workshop.....
Discussion
My friend rents a commercial unit for his business which we have equipped with a all sorts of equiptment The unit has been rented for nearly 4 years with no problems.
On Friday we turned up and there was an eviction notice on it and the locks were changed. One week to pay 3 months rent (£1100) or the contents would be sold. Same day my friend gets a recorded delivery letter stating this and that they had repeatedly tried to contact him about the matter. He is an on call engineer and his phone is answered 24 hours a day and he has never had a call, email or a letter prior to this one.
He contacts the Agent who has taken over the property from another recently and after initially saying they never had the money said they had and he used an incorrect reference when he paid the rent on time last month, property's address I think rather than their invoice no, so hardly hard to work out.
They also asked for his contact details so despite claiming to have tried to contact him numerous times his phone no and email probably wern't transferred to this new agent when they took over so repossessing and evicting was their 1st action on the matter.
He has now been locked out of his premises for 5 days and they won't give him a key unless he pays £720 for the single Euro lock they changed. I've looked up the lock and the barrel is in the region of £25 + fitting.
What can he do...even if this is legal its hugely sharp practice from one of the bigest estate agents in the UK.
Any thoughts?
On Friday we turned up and there was an eviction notice on it and the locks were changed. One week to pay 3 months rent (£1100) or the contents would be sold. Same day my friend gets a recorded delivery letter stating this and that they had repeatedly tried to contact him about the matter. He is an on call engineer and his phone is answered 24 hours a day and he has never had a call, email or a letter prior to this one.
He contacts the Agent who has taken over the property from another recently and after initially saying they never had the money said they had and he used an incorrect reference when he paid the rent on time last month, property's address I think rather than their invoice no, so hardly hard to work out.
They also asked for his contact details so despite claiming to have tried to contact him numerous times his phone no and email probably wern't transferred to this new agent when they took over so repossessing and evicting was their 1st action on the matter.
He has now been locked out of his premises for 5 days and they won't give him a key unless he pays £720 for the single Euro lock they changed. I've looked up the lock and the barrel is in the region of £25 + fitting.
What can he do...even if this is legal its hugely sharp practice from one of the bigest estate agents in the UK.
Any thoughts?
Edited by nxh66 on Tuesday 26th January 18:32
I'd have thought that, if he's paid his rent up to date prior to this, then the Agent is at fault for changing the locks and so they are liable for correcting their error.
They would seem to be in breach of the lease for doing this and so should put it right immediately.
Do you have the Landlord's contact details? I'd also contact him / her and advise them of this.
They would seem to be in breach of the lease for doing this and so should put it right immediately.
Do you have the Landlord's contact details? I'd also contact him / her and advise them of this.
nxh66 said:
He contacts the Agent who has taken over the property from another recently and after initially saying they never had the money said they had and he used an incorrect reference when he paid the rent on time last month, property's address I think rather than their invoice no, so hardly hard to work out.
They also asked for his contact details so despite claiming to have tried to contact him numerous times his phone no and email probably wern't transferred to this new agent when they took over so repossessing and evicting was their 1st action on the matter.
OP, your friend should read the first two sections of this link - https://www.commercialtrust.co.uk/commercial-mortg...They also asked for his contact details so despite claiming to have tried to contact him numerous times his phone no and email probably wern't transferred to this new agent when they took over so repossessing and evicting was their 1st action on the matter.
nxh66 said:
He has now been locked out of his premises for 5 days and they won't give him a key unless he pays £720 for the single Euro lock they changed. I've looked up the lock and the barrel is in the region of £25 + fitting.
Given that the agent has acknowledged that there are no rent arrears I reckon the landlord/agent had no lawful grounds for the lock out and are on a very sticky wicket (I doubt that the address rather than an invoice reference # will fly as an excuse). IANAL but your friend may well have an action for trespass and be able to sue for any losses arising from interruption to his business. In his position I would be getting a solicitor involved asap. Take his/her advice about whether a self-help remedy in this situation is a wise move.Something doesn't seem right. If the facts are that the tenant has been paying rent on time and it is an allocation error by the landlords agent then I would expect them to be taking all possible steps to put matters right.
However it is also the case that invariably once something goes wrong on a single property it keeps on going wrong.
Something doesnt seem right to me.
However it is also the case that invariably once something goes wrong on a single property it keeps on going wrong.
Something doesnt seem right to me.
As stated above, your friend needs to check the terms of the lease.
If he has paid the rent on time then there is presumably no breach and the agents have therefore had no reason to change the locks. There is therefore no reason for the tenant to pay for their mistake.
If the lease contains a landlord's "quiet enjoyment" covenant (i.e. a clause saying the tenant is able to enjoy and use the property without interference from the landlord) then assuming no breach has been committed by the tenant the agent's actions are arguably putting the landlord in breach of the lease.
If the position is as described, and the lease does contain a quiet enjoyment provision, I suspect the agents probably need to be put back in their box and told in no uncertain terms to remove the lock the property without cost to the tenant, or the tenant will be seeking legal advice regarding the landlord's breach of the lease.
If the agents are newly appointed they are unlikely to want to have to admit to the landlord they have made a mistake and upset a tenant, but equally they are probably trying to brazen it out in the hope that they won't end up out of pocket for the cost of the lock.
If he has paid the rent on time then there is presumably no breach and the agents have therefore had no reason to change the locks. There is therefore no reason for the tenant to pay for their mistake.
If the lease contains a landlord's "quiet enjoyment" covenant (i.e. a clause saying the tenant is able to enjoy and use the property without interference from the landlord) then assuming no breach has been committed by the tenant the agent's actions are arguably putting the landlord in breach of the lease.
If the position is as described, and the lease does contain a quiet enjoyment provision, I suspect the agents probably need to be put back in their box and told in no uncertain terms to remove the lock the property without cost to the tenant, or the tenant will be seeking legal advice regarding the landlord's breach of the lease.
If the agents are newly appointed they are unlikely to want to have to admit to the landlord they have made a mistake and upset a tenant, but equally they are probably trying to brazen it out in the hope that they won't end up out of pocket for the cost of the lock.
Take legal advice now.
Google the phrase 'Relief from forfeiture'.
Not an area I've ever had anything to do with, but if there are no arrears then I would think a judge would be very likely to grant relief. Your mate needs to not tell the landlord that others use the space.
PS most commercial leases are quarterly in advance. Check this point carefully.
Google the phrase 'Relief from forfeiture'.
Not an area I've ever had anything to do with, but if there are no arrears then I would think a judge would be very likely to grant relief. Your mate needs to not tell the landlord that others use the space.
PS most commercial leases are quarterly in advance. Check this point carefully.
I agree with the sentiment that there is something fishy here, perhaps at the landlord/agent's end.
The lease cannot be forfeited if there has been no breach, but it sounds like that could be a "he says this/we say that" thing. Has your friend got proof of the rent being paid that he can present to the agent? Bank statements showing the transfers perhaps?
Even if the lease has been forfeited lawfully, there's no right for the Landlord to seize and sell the equipment anymore - distress has been abolished. In fact, it's quite possible that the landlord has become a bailee and owes a duty of care to your friend to look after the possessions and not dispose of them. Whether the landlord gives a damn about any of this is another matter though, of course.....
The lease cannot be forfeited if there has been no breach, but it sounds like that could be a "he says this/we say that" thing. Has your friend got proof of the rent being paid that he can present to the agent? Bank statements showing the transfers perhaps?
Even if the lease has been forfeited lawfully, there's no right for the Landlord to seize and sell the equipment anymore - distress has been abolished. In fact, it's quite possible that the landlord has become a bailee and owes a duty of care to your friend to look after the possessions and not dispose of them. Whether the landlord gives a damn about any of this is another matter though, of course.....
Just read the OP in a bit more detail and sorry - I missed a relevant part.
It sounds like it has been established that the rent was been paid, albeit with an incorrect reference. If it did happen as presented then you would have to say it's all down to the agent's administrative cock up. That being the case, perhaps the landlord isn't up to something fishy after all. Does your friend have the landlord's contact details? If so, it might be worth writing to him setting out the situation and pointing out that his new agent has inadvertently placed him in breach of contract by denying access to the premises that are demised to him. If what your friend wants is just to be let back in without having to pay the (ludicrous!) fee then he could offer to waive any right to a claim against the landlord in return for being let back in. Might be worth a shot.
It might also be appropriate to lawyer up because, with no offence intended, it seems unlikely that the situation is quite as straightforward as presented. There could well be something else going on that you (and perhaps your friend) are not aware of. Bear in mind though that unless the equipment inside is very valuable, if you ended up in court it might well be on the small claims track where you won't get your costs if you win.
It sounds like it has been established that the rent was been paid, albeit with an incorrect reference. If it did happen as presented then you would have to say it's all down to the agent's administrative cock up. That being the case, perhaps the landlord isn't up to something fishy after all. Does your friend have the landlord's contact details? If so, it might be worth writing to him setting out the situation and pointing out that his new agent has inadvertently placed him in breach of contract by denying access to the premises that are demised to him. If what your friend wants is just to be let back in without having to pay the (ludicrous!) fee then he could offer to waive any right to a claim against the landlord in return for being let back in. Might be worth a shot.
It might also be appropriate to lawyer up because, with no offence intended, it seems unlikely that the situation is quite as straightforward as presented. There could well be something else going on that you (and perhaps your friend) are not aware of. Bear in mind though that unless the equipment inside is very valuable, if you ended up in court it might well be on the small claims track where you won't get your costs if you win.
The only way they can legally do that is if you are in breach of a lease term.
I know you have said rent was paid - I presume you mean that the last Quartlerly in advance payment was made on the most recent quarter day (I know this sounds a bit daft, but just to clarify).
I presume the agent hasn't mentioned that you have been deemed to be in breach of any other term of the lease? Have they actually explicitly said that the eviction notice is for non-payment of rent - or is this just inferred by yourselves as they are asking for money?
I know you have said rent was paid - I presume you mean that the last Quartlerly in advance payment was made on the most recent quarter day (I know this sounds a bit daft, but just to clarify).
I presume the agent hasn't mentioned that you have been deemed to be in breach of any other term of the lease? Have they actually explicitly said that the eviction notice is for non-payment of rent - or is this just inferred by yourselves as they are asking for money?
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff