tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22617683.post5167336694209371415..comments2023-08-15T12:32:37.166+01:00Comments on The Landlord Law Blog: Defences to possession proceedings - spurious and otherwiseTessa Sheppersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09661168506904640975noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22617683.post-32584420736083737192009-08-18T15:23:00.713+01:002009-08-18T15:23:00.713+01:00i have sucessfully defended a case on the basis th...i have sucessfully defended a case on the basis that the s21 notice is defective as the Landlord failed to place the deposit into an approve TDS scheme.Haroon Sarwarnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22617683.post-55753346648400566732009-08-18T10:34:27.109+01:002009-08-18T10:34:27.109+01:00This comment has been removed by the author.Tessa Sheppersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09661168506904640975noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22617683.post-3428073209054679282009-08-18T10:33:46.843+01:002009-08-18T10:33:46.843+01:00Come to think about it, I had an estoppel case onc...Come to think about it, I had an estoppel case once. It was back in the days when we did legal aid. It would have succeeded save for the fact that the defendant (who had acted for herself for most of the case) had annoyed the court by failing to turn up for a succession of hearings (‘illness’ again) and so the Judge refused to grant our application (which I think was to set aside the order). I used this case as the basis of one of my ‘<a href="http://www.landlordlaw.co.uk/page.ihtml?id=100&step=2&page=mem" rel="nofollow">horror stories</a>’ on Landlord-Law.Tessa Sheppersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09661168506904640975noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22617683.post-36118377199760530792009-08-17T21:58:30.860+01:002009-08-17T21:58:30.860+01:00I've successfully run "proprietary estopp...I've successfully run "proprietary estoppel". There was an option to purchase in the tenancy agreement which is pretty unusual, and then a series of agreements to waive the formalities. I get some unusual cases.<br /><br />Unsigned s.21 I have also seen (and it would be an invalid defence as there's no requirement for a signature) and of course many about the incorrect naming of days.<br /><br />Not an assured shorthold tenancy is another interesting line of argument (they aren't always of course).<br /><br />As for the form: on the one hand I do have some sympathy for dealing with what is rather a complex area of law and needlessly so, but its easy enough to buy correct off the shelf s.21's so there's not that much excuse.Francis Daveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10228026893626221724noreply@blogger.com