Course not, silly (to quote David Bowie’s response to Russell Harty during an interview I was watching in January 1973 when asked if he got giddy walking in such high platform shoes).
I was feeling gay and carefree at the time of last night’s meanderings, streams of long discarded memories coursing through my addled brain so I hope you can forgive me for giving vent.
I’m horrified, looking back at last night’s meanderings, that I referred to wandering sheep in the field overlooked by Elm Lodge, later changed to The Elms. It was rabbits and, to my eternal shame, I seem to recall having aimed my Diana air rifle at them from the landing window on at least one occasion. Never got close, inevitably, but if news got out to the family (who have no fewer than three pet rabbits - currently in care whilst the family enjoy a few day’s break in what, sadly, looks like being a cool and damp Dorset) I would be brown bread.
Update: The case was heard at Slough this afternoon, and it ended up as a mediated settlement.
The Judge, having read all the statements and evidence from both parties, and listened to the legal submissions from both sides, concluded that it was clear that there were significant problems with the property, as evidenced by the repair notice issued by the Council - primarily water leaks, damp amd black mould - which made it impossible for the tenant to safely live there. The Landlord had failed to rectify these issues within the required timeframe.
However, the tenant, although he moved out within a week having paid two months’ rent, left some of his possessions in the room, which meant the Landlord couldn’t re-let it.
So the Judge said that the Landlord would not succeed in claiming the full amount of unpaid rent, but also that the tenant should have removed all of his property when he moved out. She asked us to go outside to a conference room, and see if we could agree a settlement.
After a bit of back and forth on the numbers, we agreed that the Defendants should pay the Claimant £1,500 to include all fees and costs, and that would be the end of it. We went back and relayed that to the Judge, who made the Order in those terms.
Neither party was over the moon about that outcome, but sometimes you have to be pragmatic and accept the reality of the situation.
If only that could have been decided well in advance of court. Too many people thinking they are right and taking the law into their own hands. And keeping you in a job.
It sounds to me like the judge did a good job: telling the parties how she saw it and then sending them away to negotiate a settlement, which they duly did.
This appears to be a classic example of a case where two experienced lawyers with their clients best interests at heart would have understood the strengths and weaknesses of their respective cases and strongly encouraged both parties to resolve the case long before going to court. Sadly sometimes legal representatives on one or both sides are driven by personal ego and need for self validation and silly cases can end up in court usually to the detriment of both principals. If you find yourself in a dispute, choose your legal advice provider carefully
That’s quite right. However, I didn’t get involved in this matter until after the landlord had already issued the court claim, out of the blue. I did advise my clients, that small claims cases are always a bit of a lottery, and could go either way, but they were insistent that they wanted to defend the action, and have their day in court.
They were being sued for nearly £5k, and only ended up paying £1.5k, so it was a win of sorts.
