Address for Service

[Perry]

Do you ask for an Address for Service for your tenants?
(That's one that differs from the tenancy address and I usually
suggest a parent or sibling.) Just t'other day, I was asked by
an applicant what it was and why it was sought. I replied,
"let's say you're killed in a car or industrial accident. Who do
I contact about all your stuff?" The applicant looked
momentarily pensive and said, "yeah, that makes sense."

Whew!

Of course, there can be other reasons . . . .

[Rohb]

"let's say you're killed in a car or industrial accident. Who do
I contact about all your stuff?" The applicant looked
momentarily pensive and said, "yeah, that makes sense."

Nice one Perry

[Glenn]

The last time the act was amended they made the address for service the same as the address of the tenancy during the tenancy.
This then permitted another address to be specified.
This is all rubbish and wooly thinking.
I think that there are significant benefits to specify the address for service on the tenancy agreement as the address of the tenancy.
Now this does not mean that you can not collect up other addresses when the tenancy application is completed. Nor does it imply that new addresses can not be gathered up post the end of a tenancy.
Often it is in my advantage when taking a tenant to the tribunal, to be ignorant of another address.
The tenancy tribunal is different from other courts in that the process proceeds regardless of the tenant being there or not. It is certainly a lot easier to make ones claim in the tribunal if the tenant is not there.
The notice of the hearing is sent to the address for service. There is no obligation for the landlord to supply a "real" address for service unlike the next court proceedings for the Order for examination.
so Perry do you get my drift.
Landlords need to use every avenue legaly available to them in order to win. Justice is not really a part of the process.

[Perry]

Top marks, Glenn. Jees, you’re a wily one.
I’ll put that in my memory bank of cunning tips.

[cantthinkofanickname]

Yet another great tip. Keep them coming Glenn

[xris]

I have never orchestrated a situation where a tenant does not know there will be a TT hearing against them. The very thought of it fills me with horror. When I know full well where they are and that that address is not the address for service, I do everything I possibly can to make sure the tenants receive the hearing date. I have even contemplated asking the TT to postpone the hearing until the tenant is aware of the hearing and the possible order against them The idea of doing anything even mildly sneaky or 'clever' never enters my mind - I promise, I really do.

On another point, yes, the TT has a great priviledge which is so often overlooked by claimants, usually landlords.

Unlike other courts, a person can have an order made against him in his absence, indeed without his even knowing about it. This is hugely beneficial. Just imagine what the situation would be if both parties had to be present. Think of the examination order problems and frustrations and multiply that one hundred fold.

So, for all those who knock the TT and the RTA, just think about that and hopefully you will realise that on the whole the TT and the RTA work well. The 'problems' are more often than not caused by the landlords own ignorance - firstly allowing the problem to arise in the first place through poor management skills, and secondly through ignorance of the law and the way the follow up proceedures work.

xris

[Glenn]

The idea of doing anything even mildly sneaky or 'clever' never enters my mind - I promise, I really do.


xris

Perhaps this is why lawyers are not normally permitted in the tribunal. I can assure you that our court proceedings are for the most part operated on the "clever" principle by lawyers.
I have seen plenty of "sneaky" things done by the tenancy adjudicators. Like issuing a damages award against landlords for $990. Such an interesting figure. Like $10 short of the amount that permits the landlord to appeal.
Like making a landlord give two weeks notice to a tenant when they breach a conditional termination order instead of the normal two days that the baillif gives.
Like granting damages against the landlord and the tenant for exactly same amount in dollar terms so neither wins.
Then what about the two sets of laws about the water charges. What sort of justice system allows different interpretations of the law based on geographical location of the house.
What ever happened to the basic Roman law that the law was supposed to be fair and equally applied to all citizens without favour or bias or dependent on where they live. The RTA is not the same as the other nice courts so it has to be approached differently.
The publics eye is not on this court.

[Perry]

Are Glenn's observations not the reason why PIs often
choose to buy their way out of TT Hearings? Which is
what was suggested to me in another thread and which
is what I did.

To your list, Glenn, you can add my experience of the TT
Adjudicator changing the grounds in the application
based on a speculative presumption of bad advice by
TS or a lack of understanding by the tenants.

It was my belief (Roman or otherwise) that a defendant
must know what is being defended, well beforehand, so
that time is available to prepare.

And the RTA requires all adjudicators to be what . . . . ?

[Glenn]

Too right there Perry.
That is why you need to harden up.
Lawyers have special schooling on how to respond and prepare cases. Nothing of the sorts for landlords. TS are rather loath to provide that sort of advise. I am yet to see a decent book on the subject. Scotley Williams publications (the few that I have) do not go into this sort of stuff.