Thurrock Council Tenancy Agreement

40. An offence committed by an act or omission, the person who would exercise due diligence is considered by the police to be liable. A low level of guilt is related to an offence that was committed with little fault, for example. B due to the lack of warning/circumstances suggesting a risk, or because the omissions were minor and appeared as an isolated incident. In accordance with the Financial Transaction Tax, I accept the Council`s assessment that this infringement was at an average level of fault. The deficiencies were not negligible and the risk of inadequate fire protection measures was obvious. The case you see below fell into YT`s Twitter feed. We reproduce it because it is a salutary lesson about what your rental rights are or what they are not. The trial took place on 13 March 2012 before District Judge Hodges.

After consultation, the trial was conducted on the basis of written evidence. The hearing lasted between one and two hours. The standard form of the Council questionnaire did not ask tenants to begin their occupation and only one of the respondents volunteered for an appointment on July 6. There is no information about the sixth chamber. Mr. Daoudi also said that some tenants had not paid. He said he had always paid the rent since his grandmother`s death and had been a good tenant. He described his work and that of his partner, who in both cases was part-time. He said that they were both of limited means and that if their property was taken away from them, not only would it cause great disruption, but it would also mean that they would be homeless and that these three would have to be overthrown by the Council.

He stated that they would not be able to afford to rent on the private market and that the distance from his lease would cause him a disadvantage that would not be a reasonable advantage for the Council, whose list of councillors would not be reduced, given that the Council would have another priority family on its housing list, To take it back. He concluded by saying that ordering possession of the property would not be reasonable in all circumstances. In the event that the defendant would not otherwise have the legal right to remain in the estate, it is difficult to imagine, even when a defence is established under Article 8, under which the defence could grant the defendant an unlimited and unconditional right of residence: comp. Pinnock at [52]. This could be the consequence of a simple refusal of possession without any restrictions…