Perhaps true.
I did slip up on one case last year (would you cut that laughter).
I overlooked getting my case into the court within the required two month limit.
I think as a little tease the adjudicator would not let me recover the bond which the rotten tenant had objected to my section 22 claim of after having evicted her for non payment of rent.
So for one case out of I think about 80 applications last year I resoundly lost one and the winner was ....
wait for it ..... DBH / GOVT who got to hold onto the bond for ever.
Ps I used your tribunal ruling in court last week and got five times more awarded than ever before. That figure was still 50% less than yours so I clearly have some ground to catch up.
The problem with the solution you offer of using WINZ as some sort of defacto address for service.
It still would not work with the impossible hurdle now called for in the RTA. (well I think so)
I did slip up on one case last year (would you cut that laughter).
I overlooked getting my case into the court within the required two month limit.
I think as a little tease the adjudicator would not let me recover the bond which the rotten tenant had objected to my section 22 claim of after having evicted her for non payment of rent.
So for one case out of I think about 80 applications last year I resoundly lost one and the winner was ....
wait for it ..... DBH / GOVT who got to hold onto the bond for ever.
Ps I used your tribunal ruling in court last week and got five times more awarded than ever before. That figure was still 50% less than yours so I clearly have some ground to catch up.
The problem with the solution you offer of using WINZ as some sort of defacto address for service.
It still would not work with the impossible hurdle now called for in the RTA. (well I think so)
Comment