UK Landlord Forum / Life

You have illustrated what you assert is the Landlord's minimum and maximum exposure... forgetting about the maximum... have you decided if you get a response indicating a form of settlement may be the way forward what your own minimum acceptable level may be? Would it be the same as the Landlord's minimum (which is still going to be quite hefty, right?)? In the days of emails (I'm assuming you sent it via email and possibly backed it up with 1st Class post?) you might get a response quicker than you realise now things have gotten real.

I'll switch your questions around, if you don't mind....

Quote from: Hippogriff on May 31, 2019, 09:01:06 AMIn the days of emails (I'm assuming you sent it via email and possibly backed it up with 1st Class post?) you might get a response quicker than you realise now things have gotten real.

I sent by post x2, obtaining proof of postage in each case. It's obviously landed as I received a call form the agent this afternoon. Though, they hadn't read the letter and were just reacting to whatever the landlord had apparently (incorrectly) passed on. All manner of ridiculous things were stated, demanded and made up. It sounded very much like the landlord has not understood the content of the letter but is panicking in some way, and that the agent is in denial.

I'm also very surprised that there has been such a swift reaction...but clearly you have come to expect that this happens.

Quote from: Hippogriff on May 31, 2019, 09:01:06 AM
You have illustrated what you assert is the Landlord's minimum and maximum exposure... forgetting about the maximum... have you decided if you get a response indicating a form of settlement may be the way forward what your own minimum acceptable level may be? Would it be the same as the Landlord's minimum (which is still going to be quite hefty, right?)?

I don't expect much, if any more than the minimum. I suggested 7x earlier but you seemed to think that was a lot. The penalty is at least a bit arbitrary in nature and so it's difficult to work out what's 'correct'. Certain apologies and acknowledgements would (have) go(ne) a long way towards making the whole thing a non-issue for me but I don't hold onto much hope for those. It would be hard to be confident of their sincerity now, anyway.

Should be interesting... let's all hope they don't run down the clock or bury their heads in the sand. Always good to hear people react and act quickly for resolution.

Any settlement does not have to be a multiple of the x... i.e. 5x or 7x... it can be any number you two agree on, say, £3,000 or whatever works for you. It might be less than 1x... but even though that's less than you believe you'd be guaranteed in a Court... it's what you call a bird-in-the-hand (it's what the Landlord would definitely call a bird-in-the-hand)... it has the benefit of being guaranteed, of hopefully being quick, of still being a sizeable sum of money and it still serves the purpose of very effectively teaching someone a rather harsh lesson.

I, for one, would not relish going through the Court system, even if assured of success.

By way of an update....there is no update. Clock very much being run down; heads underground in the desert.

I suppose it's still possible to treat after a Letter Before Action and after Action...

I have now received a response - the landlord made an error in copying my new address and so it has taken a week to get here. 

I am inclined to believe that the landlord has had help writing the letter as it uses what for them is atypical language, tone and style. But it is from the landlord rather than any representative. It is also riddled with factual errors and typos.

I don't think I should post the full letter here but I have tried to extract the pertinent points and my reaction

1) The letter is written 'without prejudice save as to costs' - to be expected.
2) Taking of the deposit, the date of late protection and a subsequent failure to 'give notice in the prescribed form' are acknowledged - OK...though I think it was both the form and content of notice which lacked. I'm not sure if this matters.
3) I am accused of being aware of the law in 2015 when the deposit was finally protected and that my not making issue of the failures prior to now is an attempt to 'take advantage of the legal position and your financial gain'; my landlord does not 'believe any court would allow such conceit' - I was not aware in 2015 and although I gained an understanding some time ago and have consolidated this over time, the main reason for not raising the issue until now was so as to not prejudice my landlady's treatment of me as and while I was a tenant. In any case I am not sure this matters to the court.
4) My landlord claims to have been a conscientious and reliable landlord who attended to all my complaints - I suppose this is to some extent a matter of judgement but I very strongly do not feel the same way. I have a lot of material to support my view, should this be of relevance to the court.
5) My landlord 'believes' that fines in excess of 1x the deposit are reserved for 'rogue landlords of which I am certainly not one' - this feels like made up fluff and symptomatic of a landlord still somewhat in denial about their responsibility to adhere to the law.
6)This one is key - my landlord contends that there is no suggestion in any part of the legislation that a court would impose a fine for each default - my understanding of the legislation is that it is written in terms of a single tenancy and the requirements and penalty associated with that single tenancy and that these would apply to each of the separate tenancies.
7) Landlord offers 1x deposit in full and final settlement - presumably on the basis of the contention in 6).
8 ) I am referred to pre-action protocol around considering referring the matter to mediation - I'm happy to acknowledge/ consider this; I'm not sure whether there's anything else I actually need to do.
9) Landlord reserves the right to refer the court to their letter on the issue of costs - fine, expected.

Overall I feel like the landlord has done the bare minimum of acknowledging some indisputable facts, but remains in denial regards their culpability in respect of the deposit protection failures and for sure their conduct as landlord more generally. I think the offer they make is extremely optimistic but I suppose should be expected as a first response.

I think my response needs to cut through most of the fluff, repeat clearly my expectation (using relevant case law examples?) that five penalties of 1-3x deposit would be due in court and that therefore an offer of 1x is not a reasonable settlement compromise. I am tempted to refer to the one day periodic tenancy I did not previously identify just to reinforce that I am already seeking to be reasonable. I feel strongly that I want to object to the claim 4) above. I have records of period of months where communication was ignored and of safety and security issues raised in writing multiple times and which went unresolved for years up to the end of the tenancy. Indeed it was this, in my view, lack of conscientiousness and reliability which generated a level of dissatisfaction and ill feeling sufficient to prompt my raising of the deposit protection issue in the first place. Because of this and the tone of the letter I have received I now feel like I would only want to settle at 5x deposit i.e. what I understand is the minimum a court would award. Perhaps reducing this to 4x if the landlord is willing to apologise in writing for their conduct. I doubt that this latter point would be received well but they may be tempted to save themselves 1x deposit, and I would value the humility highly.

Again, your thoughts very much welcomed!

Read like a stereotypical crappy lawyer's letter.

Quote from: Beattieeee on June 19, 2019, 08:14:20 PM
2) Taking of the deposit, the date of late protection and a subsequent failure to 'give notice in the prescribed form' are acknowledged - OK...though I think it was both the form and content of notice which lacked. I'm not sure if this matters.

Technically, it's the information that's prescribed here, not the format the information is given.

Quote from: Beattieeee on June 19, 2019, 08:14:20 PM
3) I am accused of being aware of the law in 2015 when the deposit was finally protected and that my not making issue of the failures prior to now is an attempt to 'take advantage of the legal position and your financial gain'; my landlord does not 'believe any court would allow such conceit' - I was not aware in 2015 and although I gained an understanding some time ago and have consolidated this over time, the main reason for not raising the issue until now was so as to not prejudice my landlady's treatment of me as and while I was a tenant. In any case I am not sure this matters to the court.

It's for the landlord to comply with the law, the tenant have no duty to point out failures to the landlord. And as you said, tenant are not expected to cause problems for themselves by suing their landlord while they're still living there.

Quote from: Beattieeee on June 19, 2019, 08:14:20 PM
6)This one is key - my landlord contends that there is no suggestion in any part of the legislation that a court would impose a fine for each default - my understanding of the legislation is that it is written in terms of a single tenancy and the requirements and penalty associated with that single tenancy and that these would apply to each of the separate tenancies.

Refer them to Superstrike Ltd v Rodrigues (2013) in the Court of Appeal and subsequent judgments based on that where the courts rule that the requirements under the Housing Act 2004 apply afresh at the start of a replacement tenancy as the deposit is deemed to have been returned and repaid for the new tenancy. Then refer them to examples of first instance decisions "in which multiple awards have been made for multiple breaches, see: Kazadi v Brooks (2015) September Legal Action 51; Akrigg v Pidgeon (2016) May Legal Action 40; Chaudry v Cooley (2016) November Legal Action 40; Manu Ventures Ltd v Sida (2017) April Legal Action 39". An example of a county court appeal on the point, Howard v Dalton (2019) unreported - see Nearly Legal's blog.

Quote from: Beattieeee on June 19, 2019, 08:14:20 PM
7) Landlord offers 1x deposit in full and final settlement - presumably on the basis of the contention in 6).

If you're happy to accept 1x times 5 tenancies, then just reply with a Part 36 offer of your own with that amount. They have to be idiotic to refuse. (Not saying that won't happen...)

Quote from: Beattieeee on June 19, 2019, 08:14:20 PM
8 ) I am referred to pre-action protocol around considering referring the matter to mediation - I'm happy to acknowledge/ consider this; I'm not sure whether there's anything else I actually need to do.

Are they actually requesting mediation, or just saying you need to consider per CPR? Big difference.

You need to consider it. If you can give a reasonable justification on why you think it's not appropriate to go to mediation, you should be fine. You should make such an assessment anew each time mediation request is raised, if raised more than once.

For example, if you had made an offer to settle at 1x per tenancy, which you have good reason to believe is the legal minimum you are entitled to, then mediation would clearly not be appropriate. They admit the non-compliance, the dispute being whether the tenant is legally entitled to a penalty per tenancy, something which mediation would not resolve. After that, there's no dispute over amounts if you're offering to settle for the minimum.

Thanks KTC. I am reassured by your comments on points 2) and 3). The list of cases you provide regards 6) was very helpful; I have included these references in my response letter. Regards 7) I need to look into the format and best and most appropriate use of a part 36 offer so for now will just counter that the initial offer isn't reasonable for the reasons set out and invite another. And re 8 ) the mediation reference is just a reference, which I have acknowledged. There is no invitation to anything specific. Your points about where mediation is and isn't appropriate are useful for future reference.

Thank you again.

For 3) I find this hilarious... it's an attempt at creating doubt within you and causing you to lose faith and take the bird in the hand... rest assured it has never been the responsibility of a Tenant to ensure their Landlord complies with the law. Say you feel confident in how a Court would view this and would like to disabuse them of the notion they've raised.

For 4) simply irrelevant. It's not like they're mitigating circumstances or anything... I'd reply (if they've detailed things in points like you have) with a simple "Irrelevant." and leave it there.

For 5) through their actions they're coming close to accepting the mantle of rogue Landlord... but, once again, if you and they don't agree - suggest you let a Court decide. As pointed-out the very worst you can receive is what's been offered... so there's no incentive for you to treat at this moment in time.

For 6) we all believe they are separate breaches... there are cases... you can cite these... however a word of caution that I've also read of cases where a Judge did not award multiple times for multiple breaches (I have no Case to cite specifically, it was more commentary on a property lawyer's website, but you don't want to cite that kind of Case anyway).

On 7) I am assuming 1x only, not 1x for each accepted(?) breach? If so the offer is not really worth anything to you... your response should be a concise and polite rejection, leaving it open for them to come back. Even if 6 doesn't go your way was is being offered is quite simply not interesting to you.

I feel this may take a bit of time... and you may have to jump through some hoops to get satisfaction... but at least you're moving along now. Dialogue exists, that is only ever a good thing. You can impress upon them your points and sit back in a relaxed manner, knowing that your trump card is a visit to Court where certainty exists more for you than it does the Landlord (in my opinion). I would be patient... I might also, when you cite those Cases back, strongly imply or just state that you "have taken advice"... it's fun.

Start using phrases like "disabuse you of this notion" and "for the avoidance of doubt"... it's incredibly cathartic while sounding so rude but, believe it or not, being so polite. I am a little excited for you... I know you like writing long tomes (kinda like me) so there should be some good times ahead... and, at the end, there'll be a pay day (can't feel too bad for the Landlord, Deposit protection is so easy to get right).

Quote from: KTC on June 20, 2019, 11:39:42 PMIf you're happy to accept 1x times 5 tenancies, then just reply with a Part 36 offer of your own with that amount. They have to be idiotic to refuse. (Not saying that won't happen...)

My own reading of this was a singular 1x offer. Beattieeee would have to confirm.

Quote from: Beattieeee on June 19, 2019, 08:14:20 PMI feel strongly that I want to object to the claim 4) above.

Forget this, it's muddying the waters for no benefit to anyone. Take pleasure, instead, in dismissing its relevance.

Quote from: Hippogriff on June 22, 2019, 07:49:57 AM

Quote from: KTC on June 20, 2019, 11:39:42 PMIf you're happy to accept 1x times 5 tenancies, then just reply with a Part 36 offer of your own with that amount. They have to be idiotic to refuse. (Not saying that won't happen...)

My own reading of this was a singular 1x offer. Beattieeee would have to confirm.

That was my reading as well. I meant if Beattieeee are happy to settle for 1x times 5 tenancies, Beattieeee should make such an offer themselves to make it a decision for the landlord to risk indemnity cost.

Just to acknowledge the further guidance HG; thanks for that. For clarity, unless it was extremely poorly written, the offer was a total of 1x deposit. I sent my response, taking on board most of yours and KTC's advice, just over a week ago. I figure that although my original deadline has now passed, it would be wise and fair to allow a fresh 14 days for a response. Nothing has come back yet but I will be back to report on developments as and when they occur.

I think my former landlord still doesn't get it.

They have sent me an email. I'm paraphrasing, but it says "I acknowledge your letter. I didn't like it. I thought you were happy as my tenant. I didn't know about deposit protection as a thing. I used an agent. I never held the deposit. I have never had any issues with other tenants. I now understand you have an issue with what happened. You are raising this issue a while after the deposit was protected. You weren't financially impacted. The deposit has been returned."

No additional or re-iteration of the previous offer to settle.

My last letter was a bit longer than it needed to be, so I feel like this time I ought to use the power of brevity. Simply acknowledge receipt of the email, noting that its points have already been addressed and therefore it is irrelevant in terms of reaching a conclusion. Then give 14 days for constructive engagement towards resolution (i.e. reasonable offer as requested twice previously) with a threat to escalate failing that.

I don't know whether I should use a Part 36 offer of my own at this stage. I think I ought to before commencing proceedings, however.

Input always appreciated. Ta.

When I helped a friend challenge a unilateral Deposit deduction, where the Deposit had not been protected, I wrote one single page letter. I highlighted the breach, reinforced the law, reinforced the fact that liability is with the Landlord - not Agent, stated with confidence any Court would find against the Landlord, outlined the minimum and maximum liability and gave a timeline for a response, otherwise I'd (the ex-Tenant) would commence proceedings without further notice, and I'd seek an order to cover costs. One page of A4, with all the regular headers at the top. Concise and precise... no useful engagement comes back? Start proceedings. But, also, don't fret too much... they're not going to run down the clock on you... winding you up may be a tactic here. Maybe they are genuinely trying to appeal to your Human side.

I might be tempted to reply to the email simply stating "Thank you for your email, the contents of which are noted. For the avoidance of doubt everything stated in your email is irrelevant to the case against you. Please feel free to revise your offer to avoid Court. If you need to take further legal advice now is the time to do this. If I do not hear back by X Y I will commence proceedings without further notice."

It's enjoyable, isn't it?

Brevity.

Enjoyable....maybe. It feels like the long overdue redressing of an asymmetric power balance. Though, I don't wish to prolong things any more than is necessary to achieve a sensible and logical conclusion.

Thanks again for your help. Reply sent.

Yeah, it's enjoyable... you know it, I know it. Turning the screw when the positivity of the outcome is assured is kinda delicious. Could even be addictive... one could even enjoy it being drawn-out (silly Landlord - the best strategy is to end it quickly, even pretend you don't care!, their approach of appealing to your 'guilt' ain't gonna work)... the penalty isn't going anywhere.

It seems to me that landlords who are caught out by their failure to protect a deposit often go through the classic Kubler-Ross stages of grief: denial-anger-bargaining-depression-acceptance. It sounds like yours is still at the denial stage. The sooner they get to the bargaining stage and move on through to acceptance, the better for all concerned!

I think they might be at bargaining already... I think the guilt-tripping is a conscious part of that. After all, a supposed offer of 1x has already been made, in writing to boot. I, for one, am interested in how this all pans-out, if for no other reason than Beattieeee will have learned how to communicate in writing like a laser-focused, er... laser. Less waffle, more intimidation!

Why don't you just get on with it and start proceedings? I am not sure if you are intending to leave,or have already left?   

Quote from: Simon Pambin on July 04, 2019, 09:53:24 PM
It seems to me that landlords who are caught out by their failure to protect a deposit often go through the classic Kubler-Ross stages of grief: denial-anger-bargaining-depression-acceptance. It sounds like yours is still at the denial stage. The sooner they get to the bargaining stage and move on through to acceptance, the better for all concerned!

Quote from: Hippogriff on July 07, 2019, 06:17:40 AM
I think they might be at bargaining already... I think the guilt-tripping is a conscious part of that. After all, a supposed offer of 1x has already been made, in writing to boot. I, for one, am interested in how this all pans-out, if for no other reason than Beattieeee will have learned how to communicate in writing like a laser-focused, er... laser. Less waffle, more intimidation!

I think my landlord is cycling through the first three stages...the settlement offer has been upped from 1x deposit to 1.37x deposit, a round number in cash terms which is still nowhere near the 5x minimum I think I could expect from a court trip. The offer, complete with further repetition of irrelevant falsehoods took a full fortnight to compile. It's clear that there is a solicitor involved as well. I have been given 5 days to accept the offer.

I'm minded to respond with a counter offer of the 5x deposit, with a matching 5 day deadline. I don't know whether I need to make this offer in the form of a 'Part 36 offer' and indeed exactly what that would constitute so will spend some time over the weekend finding out.

Quote from: heavykarma on July 07, 2019, 01:11:16 PM
Why don't you just get on with it and start proceedings? I am not sure if you are intending to leave,or have already left?

Because I understand, in part due to what I have read on this website and these forums, that a letter before action and acting in good faith regards a negotiation before court is the right thing to do and to some extent a prerequisite for an optimal court outcome...should it come to that.

I have already left. I did not want to start the process until I was otherwise free of my former landlord.

Quote from: Beattieeee on July 18, 2019, 10:40:26 PMI think my landlord is cycling through the first three stages...the settlement offer has been upped from 1x deposit to 1.37x deposit, a round number in cash terms which is still nowhere near the 5x minimum I think I could expect from a court trip. The offer, complete with further repetition of irrelevant falsehoods took a full fortnight to compile. It's clear that there is a solicitor involved as well. I have been given 5 days to accept the offer.

I'm minded to respond with a counter offer of the 5x deposit, with a matching 5 day deadline. I don't know whether I need to make this offer in the form of a 'Part 36 offer' and indeed exactly what that would constitute so will spend some time over the weekend finding out.

I believe if you just write Without Prejudice on any letter you may write you can be pretty good... that may be more free-form for you and allow you to wax lyrical.  I would point out your new counter offer is the minimum you are confident of... most people counter higher, expecting to be knocked-down a bit. I think I asked this a while ago, but have you decided on a £ amount you would accept to let this all go away... it's not 1x, it's likely not 1.37x... what is it?

Even if it's 1x you've still won, right? You've definitely proven your point and you've definitely given someone a bloody nose... it's just now whether you want to snap their thumbs and leave marks on their arse, I guess? I suppose if you've already booked the Maldives it needs paying for... but I suspect you may not done that.

The 5x minimum you'd expect from a Court trip would be for you... for them it would be "plus costs"... don't forget that... please use "for the avoidance of doubt" in your reply when reiterating this. Also... I think it does no harm at all to at least give the impression that actually want your day in Court... it's not something you're trying that hard to avoid doing... to avoid going to Court they're gonna have to start being sensible... dealing with you in a credible manner.

The good thing is - there's movement. Glacial... but movement. Fun, isn't it? Don't lie...

I would probably take pleasure in replying in an in-line vein like this:

"I have been an excellent Landlord who took you on when you were at a low point in your life, a struggling Author with no book deal and no outlet in which to vent your words."

Noted. Irrelevant.

"I have always taken my repairing responsibilities seriously and every time you asked for a repair to be carried out I ensured it was done within 48 hours."

Noted. Irrelevant.

"I have done nothing but good by you, I cannot fathom why you would now turn on me in this manner, weren't we friends, or at least friendly?"

Noted. Irrelevant.

Quote from: Hippogriff on July 19, 2019, 09:47:25 AM
I believe if you just write Without Prejudice on any letter ...

"Without prejudice save as to cost" rather than just without prejudice so it can be considered when it come to cost assessment after winning in court if you go that far.

QuoteI'm minded to respond with a counter offer of the 5x deposit, with a matching 5 day deadline. I don't know whether I need to make this offer in the form of a 'Part 36 offer' and indeed exactly what that would constitute so will spend some time over the weekend finding out.

I can't remember the minimum deadline for Part 36, probably like 2 weeks, and if you want it taken into account during cost assessment, don't withdraw it even after that. (i.e. they can accept late, but there's cost consequence to do so.)

Just make your own settlement offer, or issue a claim, or both already.

Quote from: Hippogriff on July 19, 2019, 09:47:25 AM

Quote from: Beattieeee on July 18, 2019, 10:40:26 PMI think my landlord is cycling through the first three stages...the settlement offer has been upped from 1x deposit to 1.37x deposit, a round number in cash terms which is still nowhere near the 5x minimum I think I could expect from a court trip. The offer, complete with further repetition of irrelevant falsehoods took a full fortnight to compile. It's clear that there is a solicitor involved as well. I have been given 5 days to accept the offer.

I'm minded to respond with a counter offer of the 5x deposit, with a matching 5 day deadline. I don't know whether I need to make this offer in the form of a 'Part 36 offer' and indeed exactly what that would constitute so will spend some time over the weekend finding out.

I believe if you just write Without Prejudice on any letter you may write you can be pretty good... that may be more free-form for you and allow you to wax lyrical.  I would point out your new counter offer is the minimum you are confident of... most people counter higher, expecting to be knocked-down a bit. I think I asked this a while ago, but have you decided on a £ amount you would accept to let this all go away... it's not 1x, it's likely not 1.37x... what is it?

Even if it's 1x you've still won, right? You've definitely proven your point and you've definitely given someone a bloody nose... it's just now whether you want to snap their thumbs and leave marks on their arse, I guess? I suppose if you've already booked the Maldives it needs paying for... but I suspect you may not done that.

The 5x minimum you'd expect from a Court trip would be for you... for them it would be "plus costs"... don't forget that... please use "for the avoidance of doubt" in your reply when reiterating this. Also... I think it does no harm at all to at least give the impression that actually want your day in Court... it's not something you're trying that hard to avoid doing... to avoid going to Court they're gonna have to start being sensible... dealing with you in a credible manner.

Quote from: Hippogriff on July 19, 2019, 09:51:45 AM
The good thing is - there's movement. Glacial... but movement. Fun, isn't it? Don't lie...

Quote from: Hippogriff on July 19, 2019, 09:54:59 AM
I would probably take pleasure in replying in an in-line vein like this:

"I have been an excellent Landlord who took you on when you were at a low point in your life, a struggling Author with no book deal and no outlet in which to vent your words."

Noted. Irrelevant.

"I have always taken my repairing responsibilities seriously and every time you asked for a repair to be carried out I ensured it was done within 48 hours."

Noted. Irrelevant.

"I have done nothing but good by you, I cannot fathom why you would now turn on me in this manner, weren't we friends, or at least friendly?"

Noted. Irrelevant.

Noted. Thanks.

Heh heh. It is more fun than writing letters as an active tenant and these being ignored. But then, money talks.

I think that given 5x is the minimum I set out in my LBA (and in fact there's the one day periodic tenancy '1b' which I am choosing to overlook) that my minimum settlement figure is close to 5x to be honest. Things would be different if the response had been different. There's no Maldives trip to pay for thankfully, and a few more pressing priorities once the final figure is known. In any case, give me an overcast weekend in a decent pub somewhere rural over a long haul flight to a beach and too much heat, any time!

Quote from: KTC on July 19, 2019, 10:29:34 AM

Quote from: Hippogriff on July 19, 2019, 09:47:25 AM
I believe if you just write Without Prejudice on any letter ...

"Without prejudice save as to cost" rather than just without prejudice so it can be considered when it come to cost assessment after winning in court if you go that far.

QuoteI'm minded to respond with a counter offer of the 5x deposit, with a matching 5 day deadline. I don't know whether I need to make this offer in the form of a 'Part 36 offer' and indeed exactly what that would constitute so will spend some time over the weekend finding out.

I can't remember the minimum deadline for Part 36, probably like 2 weeks, and if you want it taken into account during cost assessment, don't withdraw it even after that. (i.e. they can accept late, but there's cost consequence to do so.)

Just make your own settlement offer, or issue a claim, or both already.

I've countered asking for 5x. So if the response isn't credible then the Court claim will be lodged and should we get there then the judge will decide the penalty with the background that the landlord knowingly refused to settle at the in-Court minimum for five tenancies.

Thank you both for your replies.

Quote from: Beattieeee on July 22, 2019, 09:45:29 PM
I've countered asking for 5x. So if the response isn't credible then the Court claim will be lodged and should we get there then the judge will decide the penalty with the background that the landlord knowingly refused to settle at the in-Court minimum for five tenancies.

No. The court (i.e. the judge) must not be told / have sight of any "without prejudice" or "without prejudice save as to cost" communication before the final judgment. The judgment itself is based on the merit of the case with its evidences and legal arguments. Then after the judgment, the court decides how much cost are awarded (usually) to the winning side. It's here where the one side go "hey I offered to settled for less than I won, the other side should had settled and would have saved us X months".

Be prepared for a 1.5x offer coming back... softly-softly-catchee-monkey.

Quote from: KTC on July 23, 2019, 07:43:11 AM

Quote from: Beattieeee on July 22, 2019, 09:45:29 PM
I've countered asking for 5x. So if the response isn't credible then the Court claim will be lodged and should we get there then the judge will decide the penalty with the background that the landlord knowingly refused to settle at the in-Court minimum for five tenancies.

No. The court (i.e. the judge) must not be told / have sight of any "without prejudice" or "without prejudice save as to cost" communication before the final judgment. The judgment itself is based on the merit of the case with its evidences and legal arguments. Then after the judgment, the court decides how much cost are awarded (usually) to the winning side. It's here where the one side go "hey I offered to settled for less than I won, the other side should had settled and would have saved us X months".

Thanks, that's an important distinction.