OV9

Thanks @integrale_evo, that's what I assumed you'd done. Air source heat pump with underfloor heating is what we're looking to do and just need to look at glazing options. Should be more than toasty enough!

Planning application for ours is now in... and so the requests for payment start to appear. £600 to the council. And then another £150 for them to place another advert in the local press. I think I'd happily pay double if it guaranteed they'd actually look at the request within 6 months this time...

After a few more random delays and diversions, we issued a possession claim last week. This is really serious. It's hard to believe they're still fighting it. They are still ranting about there not having been any breaches of the lease and that they will appeal to the high court.

As ever, we've advised that they really, really, really must seek competent legal advice.

Gavster wrote: Fri Nov 24, 2023 8:25 am It's hard to believe they're still fighting it.

I really don't think they were about to give in - they're far too entrenched.

When you get the possession order I imagine it'll be great fun actually getting possession. Set up a surreptitious Gopro when the bailiffs arrive.

Jobbo wrote: Fri Nov 24, 2023 8:49 am Set up a surreptitious Gopro when the bailiffs arrive.

Oh yeah please do...

I have images in my mind of this, though: https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/no ... s-20859081 - planning enforcement rather than bailiffs, but an analogous situation.

I am definitely making sure that we have GoPros going into their place. Might ask the bailiffs to wear a bodycam.

And a bullet-proof vest.

I doubt they'd be violent tbh, angry for sure, and they'll blame me for everything - because they believe nothing in their life is their fault, even when we were friends they would tell stories about how so-and-so has wronged them, or how XYZ shouldn't have done something to them. What's most likely is they will refuse to acknowledge the authority of the bailiffs, or the writ and we'll end up with the police attending too.

You should sell tickets to that

My mate has a food truck - we could make a killing

Can you get sheriff John Bunnell to narrate the video?

Gavster wrote: Fri Nov 24, 2023 9:43 am I am definitely making sure that we have GoPros going into their place. Might ask the bailiffs to wear a bodycam.

I’d imagine they already will be, but you probably won’t get to see the footage. You could ask them to wear a go pro for you but I think the answer will be a flat no

Gavster wrote: Fri Nov 24, 2023 8:25 am
As ever, we've advised that they really, really, really must seek competent legal advice.

What happens if they don't - could that be used as some sort of get out clause?

unzippy wrote: Thu Nov 30, 2023 12:26 am

Gavster wrote: Fri Nov 24, 2023 8:25 am
As ever, we've advised that they really, really, really must seek competent legal advice.

What happens if they don't - could that be used as some sort of get out clause?

Solicitors will always make sure they keep advising an unrepresented party to get their own legal advice - there's no silver bullet get-out for someone to say they didn't understand what was going on, but it makes it a hell of lot easier to show that you've been reasonable with them when you try to take their house away.

unzippy wrote: Thu Nov 30, 2023 12:26 am

Gavster wrote: Fri Nov 24, 2023 8:25 am
As ever, we've advised that they really, really, really must seek competent legal advice.

What happens if they don't - could that be used as some sort of get out clause?

As Jobbo said, every single letter for the last four years has been signed off with my solicitor urging them to seek competent legal advice in this matter.

In fact, one of the most recent letters clearly states what issues they need to seek advice on, and sets out with absolute clarity what their immediate and significant risks are by not remedying the breaches. It advises them what timeframe they have to resolve those things, and the nature of the court orders that we are seeking to enforce. That letter tells them three times that they should seek advice or they risk losing their home.

One of the main parts of the legal process seems to be ensuring that the other party have zero opportunity to say "Oh, but we didn't realise that". To some extent our letters have been telling the neighbours what their own solicitor should be telling them.

Madness.. feel sorry for them, and imagine they’ll end up in a care home

Gavster wrote: Thu Nov 30, 2023 8:45 am One of the main parts of the legal process seems to be ensuring that the other party have zero opportunity to say "Oh, but we didn't realise that".

When it comes to something as draconian as making someone homeless, no matter the legal rights and wrongs a judge in a court will always want to be 100% certain that the order he makes is right.

In some cases (such as the chap who went to Turkey on holiday, got the shits and sued Tui all the way to the Supreme Court - judgment given yesterday in his favour) one party doesn't put any evidence forward so effectively the other's evidence must be taken as accepted: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2021-0208.html (Idiotic on Tui's or their solicitor's part - the evidence did not really prove the claimant's case but they simply failed to provide any evidence at all which might have disproved it). If your neighbours didn't produce any evidence or anything that helped their case because they didn't bother to take advice, any judge is going to be very uncomfortable ordering them to vacate their home. If a case of the shits can go to the Supreme Court, that's not surprising

FWIW the neighbours did have a solicitor for a few months, however their relationship was very peculiar. At first he was actively defending them, then after a while that stopped. The neighbour would write a long, wordy letter, full of nonsense legalese, and then demand the solicitor would forward it to us. Almost all of our communications were "My client has requested this letter be forwarded to you". They ceased working together shortly after that and the neighbour went back to representing himself.

Didn't pay the solicitor, I imagine.

Jobbo wrote: Thu Nov 30, 2023 10:06 am Didn't pay the solicitor, I imagine.

More likely they tried to tell the solicitor how to do hours job because they knew better, probably followed by not paying them because he was an amateur in their eyes

jamcg wrote: Fri Dec 01, 2023 10:04 pm

Jobbo wrote: Thu Nov 30, 2023 10:06 am Didn't pay the solicitor, I imagine.

More likely they tried to tell the solicitor how to do hours job because they knew better, probably followed by not paying them because he was an amateur in their eyes

That sounds spot on, have you met my neighbours?