header-logo header-logo

14 April 2011 / Robert Eckford
Issue: 7461 + 7462 / Categories: Features , Landlord&tenant , Property
printer mail-detail

When protection matters

Robert Eckford explains how the Court of Protection can help with “hoarders” & unco-operative tenants

A common problem faced by social landlords is the hoarding tenant or the tenant who refuses to engage or co-operate with their landlord, or with social services in providing support for their tenancy.

Such tenants can cause significant problems for landlords. Hoarders can accumulate volumes of rubbish and clutter leading to unsafe and unhygienic conditions in the property, including posing a fire risk or leading to infestations. This in turn can affect the tenant’s neighbours and lead to complaints.

Non-engagement by a tenant can also causes problems, such as refusing to permit the landlord to enter the property for inspections or to undertake works, or refusing to pay rent. Either type of tenant is likely to be in breach of their tenancy as a result.

Injunctions

In some cases the landlord can seek an injunction from the court. This can be an effective remedy as it forces the tenant to clear their property or allows the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll