What can a landlord do where a former tenant’s belongings are left at the premises?

/in /by

It is question that I am often asked and can cause landlords more difficulties and time having already, on some occasions, gone through the difficult procedure in getting a tenant to leave their premises in the first place.

Landlords are often faced with the issue of how to deal with belongings left behind by their former tenants at the end of their tenancies. The risk to the landlord of disposing of items of obvious rubbish may be small, especially where a tenant has vacated voluntarily at the end of the term or surrender their tenancy. There may, however, be a greater risk in either of the following situations:

  • Where larger or more valuable items are left behind.
  • Where the landlord has forfeited a lease or enforced a possession order.

A tenant is generally obliged to remove their goods from the premises at the end of the term. A lease or tenancy agreement will often expressly oblige the tenant to remove any goods at the end of the term. Some leases will also clarify what the landlord can do with any goods that may be left on the premises at the end of the term.

If goods are left on the premises once the lease has come to an end, however it ends, the items remain the former tenant’s property. The exception to this is where the former tenant has abandoned his/her belongings. In the absence of express terms in a lease, the landlord is left with the problem of deciding what to do with these.

If the tenant has moved out and abandoned the goods, the landlord will usually be free to deal with those goods as it sees fit. If the former tenant has not abandoned the goods, however, the retention and sale or disposal of the goods by the landlord may give the tenant grounds for bringing a claim against the landlord.

A useful tool for the landlord to use is to serve a notice under the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977 (“TIGA”). This imposes an obligation to collect the goods on the owner by giving notice and gives the person in possession the right to sell the goods if they are not collected.

The content of a notice would include that the goods are ready to collect, address as to where the goods are held and what amount if any are due to the landlord for storing the goods. If the tenant fails to respond or refuses to collect the goods then the Landlord can give a further notice of their intention to sell the goods under section 12(3) of the TIGA 1977. This notice would set out similar details as the first notice and include the date on or after which the landlord intends to sell the goods.

With both notices the landlord must give a reasonable opportunity to collect the goods. What is reasonable will depend on the circumstances of each case.

For more information and advice on this and how this may affect you please contact Anton Bilinski who is able to guide you through this and act for you when a landlord or tenant dispute arises.

Anton Bilinski
Chartered Legal Executive
Litigation Department

Support For British Heart Foundation

/in /by
Jenny Carpenter and Shoshana Goldhill present cheque to Dianna Richardson

Jenny Carpenter and Shoshana Goldhill present cheque to Dianna Richardson

Jenny Carpenter and Shoshana Goldhill, Partners at Adams Harrison Solicitors, presented a cheque for £350 to Dianna Richardson, local manager of the British Heart Foundation shop in Saffron Walden.

The donation represents one of three given by the partners of Adams Harrison to local charities as part of its Christmas giving campaign.

Charities chosen by staff from Adams Harrison’s other two branches, at Haverhill and Sawston, will also benefit from donations of the same amount.

Support For “Friends Of The Cangle”

/in /by

We were delighted to support the New Cangle Community Primary School in Haverhill, who sent us this lovely thank you letter

The ‘Friends of the Cangle’ would like to thank you for your very kind donation towards our annual Christmas Fayre to raise funds for New Cangle CP School. The Fayre was an enormous success and we are delighted to tell you we raised a grand total of £702.48. Every penny raised will be used to purchase much needed items to benefit every child within the school. We could not have done this without your help and support.
Once again thank you so much from all of us here.
Happy New Year.

Yours faithfully

Tish Donovan
(Chairperson)

Haverhill Triathalon Sponsorship

/in /by
Haverhill Triathlon Cheque Presentation to Haverhill Scouts

Haverhill Triathlon Cheque Presentation to Haverhill Scouts

Adams Harrison are proud to sponsor the Haverhill Triathlon and would like to offer our thanks to Jack Tappin and his team whose hard work ensures its continuing success.

We also wish to congratulate those athletes who braved the atrocious weather to compete in this year’s event and as always we are pleased to donate the funds raised to the Haverhill Scouts.

10 Years Service By Rebecca Monk

/in /by

Rebecca Monk with the bouquet provided by the partners to congratulate her on completion of 10 years service with the practice.

Becky is based in our Accounts Department and is also our go to lady for all our in-house IT queries.

Rebecca Monk Of Adams Harrison 10 Years Service

Christmas Jumper Event At Adams Harrison

/in /by

The staff at Adams Harrison once again joined in the Christmas spirit raising money for charity by wearing their finest Christmas Jumpers.

Adams Harrison Christmas Jumper Event Sawston Office Dec 2019

Sawston Office – front row left Sue Lawton right Lisa Thornhill – back row left Kath Moralee and right Christine Gee

Adams Harrison Christmas Jumper Event Saffron Walden Office Dec 2019

Saffron Walden Office – left to right Lisa Kitchener; Nancy Carley,; Melanie Pratlett; Alison Helbert; Susan Kerr; Rebecca Monk and front Teresa Pitts

Adams Harrison Christmas Jumper Event Haverhill Office Dec 2019

Haverhill Office – left to right – Cathy Buck, Jenny Carpenter, Michelle Salmon

Who To Appoint As Executors Under Your Will.

/in /by

When making a Will you should consider carefully the right Executor to appoint as the role of an Executor carries important legal duties and responsibilities.

It is an Executor’s duty to administer the estate in accordance with the terms of the Will and in accordance with the law. Executors are personally liable for their errors or omissions. It is therefore extremely important you appoint somebody that you trust to carry out this role efficiently and responsibly. You can appoint an individual such as your spouse/partner, a family member or even a close friend.

You may however not wish to put this responsibility on an individual. You are therefore able to appoint professional Executors such as solicitors.

Dealing with the death of a loved one is a difficult time at best. Unfortunately it can also release underlying tensions and resentments between friends and even family members. By appointing a professional Executor such as Adams Harrison this would minimise any disputes that can arise.

Sadly, some Wills are challenged, especially where one beneficiary benefits more than others. Allegations of undue influence or lack of capacity can arise in these cases. By appointing Adams Harrison as Executors, your estate has a professional on hand who can rebut such allegations and robustly defend your last wishes.

If you wish to discuss making a Will or you require any further advice on this, please contact our Wills, Estates and Trust Team.

Leanne Mayes   Legal Executive

Good Luck To Emma Laidlaw

/in /by

Good luck and very best wishes to our Emma Laidlaw, Legal Executive who starts her maternity leave today following her office baby shower yesterday.

Emma Laidlaw Of Adams Harrison Starts Maternity Leave

Haverhill Schools Fair 2019

/in /by
Jennifer Carpenter and Sue Lawton Of Adams Harrison

Jennifer Carpenter and Sue Lawton Of Adams Harrison at Haverhill Schools Fair 2019

Jenny Carpenter and Sue Lawton from Adams Harrison attended the schools fair at the Haverhill Arts Centre from 4pm to 6pm on 13th November. Parents and students attended from Haverhill based schools, Castle Manor School, Samuel Ward School and Churchill School.

We were pleased to receive feedback from the organiser;

I hope you will all agree that between us we have managed another successful event to support the students within the town.
Again, I would like to express both mine and the Partnerships thanks for your efforts to make these events the success they are.

Early Neutral Evaluation: Another Victory for Alternative Dispute Resolution

/in /by

Following the Woolf Reforms in April 1999 with the replacement of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) meant that prospective litigants were to make every effort to settle their differences via pre-action protocols with the intention of avoiding Court proceedings.

The most common aspect of ADR was mediation. Whilst CPR required the Court to manage cases actively by encouraging each party to use ADR the rules fell short of making ADR mandatory. However the risks of costs penalties that likely befall those who ignore such offers of ADR were sufficient to bring them into line. Even if you are successful, an unreasonable refusal to mediate would impact upon your cost recovery.

On the 1st October 2015 the CPR concerning the court’s powers of case management were amended to ‘any other step or make any other order for the purpose of managing the case and furthering the overriding objective including hearing an Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) with the aim of helping the parties settle the case’

Early Neutral Evaluation is an alternative dispute resolution procedure whereby the parties agree to submit their dispute to an independent third-party expert to provide a preliminary view on the merits of the parties’ respective positions.

The evaluation is not binding on the parties unless the parties elect for it to be and is entirely without prejudice. The process is particularly useful where the parties have very differing views of the prospects of success and perhaps an inadequate understanding of the risks of litigation itself.

Until now it has not been clear whether the court could impose ENE on the parties without their consent. In Lomax v Lomax, decided on 20 May 2019, Parker J held that it could not. She held, “on the finest of fine balances”, that she could not order an ENE essentially because the Rules were not clear when one party had not consented to ENE.

The Court of Appeal set aside Parker J’s decision on 6 August 2019. In the leading judgment Moylan LJ’s view on the words “encouraging” and “facilitating” in CPR 1.4(2)(e) did not lead to the implication that consent was required nor was there any limitation on the court’s power to order an ENE hearing to the effect that the agreement or consent of the parties was required.

The decision by the Court of Appeal in Lomax v Lomax has given the court more power in directing ADR no matter how entrenched each party may appear to be.

ENE can be an effective means of dispute resolution to get a practical view of the merits of each parties respective positions without spending large amounts on litigation.

Anton Bilinski
Legal Executive