Police forced entry to house! Sent me the bill.

[Chris Perkins 228]

Hmmm, where do I start. This post is by way of a general moan really, but perhaps certain forum members may have advice on the matter.

My dad got a bill for me today at his London address that I use for UK correspondance. A bill for £202 odd from a company called Rapid Secure working under instruction of Kent Constabulary. It seems that on the 17th April the company secured my house in Kent which is rented to a Mr Green (which may or may not be his real name).

This was the first I'd heard of it! I called the company and then the police and it seems that the police had to force entry to search the house under a Section 18 (which seems to mean that they were looking for evidence or dodgy stuff in relation to a crime for which someone living at the house had been arrested). Due to the data protection act I had to email them to find out this information, even though I pointed out that an email is just as annoymous as a voice on a telephone.

I tried to call tenant Mr Green and there was no answer. I sent him a text asking if everything was alright and mentioning the £202 odd bill. He replied quite quickly and said that the police had broken the front door down, boarded it up and told him not to go back there 'for threat to his life' (not sure what that's supposed to mean). He says he's not been there for weeks and that he now can't get to his belongings and that he'd lost my contact details due to this, although clearly he's got his phone. I tried to call to find out more, but generally no one answers, except for once an hour or so ago when a female voice answered that sounded like a very sleepy Ms Brown (which may or may not be his girlfriend's name). I asked if Mr Green was there, she mumbled 'he's on the ....' and then it went quiet. I asked 'is that you Ms Brown?'. But it was quiet and then went dead. I called back right away and it rang for some time before going dead again.

Something is clearly awry. I'm waiting to hear from the 2 Constables that carried out the Section 18 on 17th April and in the mean time I've sent a friend to the house (he lives a good 45 mins away but is the closest person I know) to have a look.

I imagine this is a good reason to kick out tenants? He owes this months rent and surely must also be liable for the securing of the property and a new door? As a landlord, what rights/chances do I have of taking his belongings as payment? Obviously that would need to go to court I suspect. Sounds like a lot of hassle, whatever has gone on here.

[choolie 0]

oh bummer; good luck with that.

[Peter 615]

Chris

I don't envy you.

We have a tenant in our other property and have had no problems,we let it through an agent and pay 7.5% for the piece of mind.

If he has been a good tenant he doesn't need a kicking from you when he is down.

I think you need to speak to the police.To have your door kicked down by the police sounds like a possible custodial sentence.

If,like you I was living a considerable distance from the property a management company seems a no brainer.

[argentumandcoins 70]

Chris, a Section 18 search is a search authorised by an Inspector or above following the arrest and detention of a person or persons who are resident of or have access to that property. Following entry the Police would use what is known as a rota joiner (basically an approved joiner that is on a Police rotation list to stop nepotism and bungs) to re-secure the premises. It's strange that a joiner had to be used though as all the 18's I ever did I had the scrotes keys with me (and quite often the scrote or his agent, to ensure the search was conducted properly) so I never had to use the whammer?

As for eviction of Mr Green and Ms Brown, I suspect Mr Pink may sort the job for you, oops sorry slipped into Hollywood for a second, you need to see a brief innit mate? That is unfortunately a civil matter which is outwith my knowledge/experience. I do know that you do not want the attention of the old Bill every week or two to sort out The Usual Suspects though!

[Accumulator 52]

Hi Chris, I always use a management company who let on a standard 6 month shorthold assured tenancy. In my experience the only thing to do with a 'bad' tenant (i.e. one who treats the place badly or, more usually, doesn't pay) is to go straight for eviction. The legal procedure takes 13 weeks and sometimes you just have to swallow the loss of rent. Most agents will be familiar with the process and usually don't charge because they were responsible for finding the bad tenant in the first place and should have done the checks! This doesn't help with the loss of rent, of course.

Usually you have to take the hit and move on. Just get the 13 week period underway asap to avoid any more loss.

[Chris Perkins 228]

My friend has been to the house, there was no signs of life and none of the cars were outside that are known to belong to Mr Green or Ms Brown. The upper pain in the front door has been replaced with a secure board, the door is dented and the lock is removed, but it doesn't open so must be secured from the inside. The back door looks normal, so do the windows. I'm pleased the house is secure at least.

I suppose if Mr Green didn't happen to have a back door key with him whilst out and about on the 17th when the Police visited, then he's locked out. I wonder if it's something domestic, but I have no idea why he should say his life would be at risk (unless it's at risk from a father or brother of someone he has in some way inconvenienced)!

He's simply not communicating, but I haven't tried further today. I'll send him an ultimatum text and also try email. I'm not over in GB myself for about 3 weeks. The rent for April was technically due at the end of March, but he's hardly in arrears and hasn't been so bad lately, despite loads of unreliability in the past.

I found him and Ms Brown privately and they've been there since Sep 2009, so it's a good 2.5 years worth of rent paid to date. I dislike agencies as they (last time I looked/used them) charge a months rent per tenant change (which is usually fairly frequently) and the % each month, and in the event of a problem you still have to stick to the procedure, and I'd rather deal with such issues personally too. The only benefit they offer is that they vet the potential tenants. The 2.5 years paid to date must mean that my own vetting based on instinct couldn't have been far out. I must say that Mr Green did oringally re-decorate and do quite a few odd jobs with materials that he paid for himself, although somehow the work hasn't stood up to the test of time very well.

I always found him a good bloke really. His communication has always been pretty awful and he seems very good at losing my numbers (and post actually) and making me chase up the rent because he tends to stick his head in the sand rather than face up to things like a real man. This time though, it's really not good enough. I need to know what's going on.

Actually, I've just remembered a girl I know is an estate agent who specialises in rentals in the same area as my house. I'm going to get onto her tomorrow! (steady).

[Accumulator 52]

You don't mention the type of tenancy agreement you have. As I say, if it's a Shorthold tenancy you can get the property back in 13 weeks. If you arranged it privately and didn't get a proper tenancy agreement in place it could take you an awful lot longer. The law in such cases very much favours the tenant over the landlord.

[Peter 615]

As you have had 2 1/2 years rent with minimal fuss it would seem working with the tenant could be a possibility.

Maybe its me but I try to look at the good things in people.

The communication seems a stumbling block but hey now's your chance.

[argentumandcoins 70]

Sorry to poo on your party Chris but the reason for entry is a little more than Domestic. An 18 is only authorised to secure and preserve evidence of criminal offences (predominantly drugs or stolen goods). As for his life being in danger, ahem, cough, cough, bullshit, unless of course the polis found his stash that he hasn't paid his supplier for but even then it would have to be a huge amount and accomadation would be provided FOC to your Mr Green courtesy of HMP pre-trial remand.

[Chris Perkins 228]

It was on an Assured Shorthold Tenancy Agreement, originally for 12 months, then another 12 months (to Sep 2011) and since then it hasn't been renewed as it's a such a bloody pain getting them to sign anything, unless I actually go there and hold the papers and a pen in front of them, and i've got better things to do. Last time they claimed they had returned the docs back twice but nothing ever came.

So technically there is no valid contract. Where do I stand? Does that make them sort of legal squatters? I don't suppose they kept copies of the tenancy agreements and he always pays cash into my bank account (which is odd these days) so they probably have no evidence that they were authorised to live there. They get benefits, but stopped them coming directly to me after one payment, prefering to pay the cash in at the bank down the road. This has worked off and on for 2.5 years, but please don't think it was plain sailing! At no stage during the 2.5 years have I been able to rely on the money going in at the agreed time to cover the mortgage. He pays in dribs and drabs, sometimes nothing for months despite many reminders.

Anyway, I'll hopefully hear from the PC's that carried out the search tomorrow. I suspect they have weekends off.

I've just remembered actually that the loft had a padlock on it because it contains some of my stuff (nothing valuable) in storage that was too bulky to take to Germany and has been up there for years. I wonder if the police went through that as well!

[Accumulator 52]

It was on an Assured Shorthold Tenancy Agreement, originally for 12 months, then another 12 months (to Sep 2011) and since then it hasn't been renewed as it's a such a bloody pain getting them to sign anything, unless I actually go there and hold the papers and a pen in front of them, and i've got better things to do. Last time they claimed they had returned the docs back twice but nothing ever came.

So technically there is no valid contract. Where do I stand? Does that make them sort of legal squatters? I don't suppose they kept copies of the tenancy agreements and he always pays cash into my bank account (which is odd these days) so they probably have no evidence that they were authorised to live there. They get benefits, but stopped them coming directly to me after one payment, prefering to pay the cash in at the bank down the road. This has worked off and on for 2.5 years, but please don't think it was plain sailing! At no stage during the 2.5 years have I been able to rely on the money going in at the agreed time to cover the mortgage. He pays in dribs and drabs, sometimes nothing for months despite many reminders.

Anyway, I'll hopefully hear from the PC's that carried out the search tomorrow. I suspect they have weekends off.

I've just remembered actually that the loft had a padlock on it because it contains some of my stuff (nothing valuable) in storage that was too bulky to take to Germany and has been up there for years. I wonder if the police went through that as well!

You should be ok then. I think that the original Shorthold Tenancy automatically becomes a Periodic Tenancy if you didn't actually renew it. You will need to check this though. If so, I would personally take the opportunity to find new tenants, get an agent and do everything properly in future. It's different if you're around to look after things but being abroad it's just not worth the risk.

[TomGoodheart 402]

Can you get the locks changed? Might be worth it for doors the (now ex-) tenants had keys for. Doesn't sound as if they are too bothered about collecting their stuff so you'll need to give them reasonable time to do so and then tell them you'll chuck it or whatever ..

[Chris Perkins 228]

Can you get the locks changed? Might be worth it for doors the (now ex-) tenants had keys for. Doesn't sound as if they are too bothered about collecting their stuff so you'll need to give them reasonable time to do so and then tell them you'll chuck it or whatever ..

I actually would tend to believe that they are locked out already. Personally I always used to leave the back door key in the house, hanging up somewhere. If they do the same and it's inside, then they are already locked out due to the front door being blocked up.

When I'm over there in a few weeks, do I have the right to enter the property? I've got a back door key, so it won't be a problem assuming the lock is the original.

[TomGoodheart 402]

Can you get the locks changed? Might be worth it for doors the (now ex-) tenants had keys for. Doesn't sound as if they are too bothered about collecting their stuff so you'll need to give them reasonable time to do so and then tell them you'll chuck it or whatever ..

I actually would tend to believe that they are locked out already. Personally I always used to leave the back door key in the house, hanging up somewhere. If they do the same and it's inside, then they are already locked out due to the front door being blocked up.

When I'm over there in a few weeks, do I have the right to enter the property? I've got a back door key, so it won't be a problem assuming the lock is the original.

Just to be absolutely above board, I would give him notice of this. A text saying you will be visiting the house should do. Can you take your estate agent friend too, to avoid accusations you damaged or knicked stuff while there?

Yeah, I know, but ..

[Chris Perkins 228]

Yes, that sounds like a good idea. I'm sure I can drag her along in an official capacity with a view to becoming my agent and finding new tenants. I'll be over a few days before the London Coin fair on the 26th May.

[Peter 615]

Yes, that sounds like a good idea. I'm sure I can drag her along in an official capacity with a view to becoming my agent and finding new tenants. I'll be over a few days before the London Coin fair on the 26th May.

Do you trust your Estate Agent friend?..alone in a house with you vulnerable.

[Chris Perkins 228]

I'll take a chance. I want to do this properly, without the need for forced entry.

[Chris Perkins 228]

The police were looking for a shooter.

It seems Mr Green was involved in a shooting to do with rival car related businesses, which I think may have involved his brother doing the shooting, or being shot. There were no fatalities and 2 injured men are now out of hospital.

On the 17th April (a couple of days after the incident) Mr Green went to the police station of his own free will to help with enquiries, and I know this to be true. From what I can make out, it was whilst he was there that they raided my house, looking for the gun. I suspect he was arrested, as a section 18 search of a house has to involve an arrest as far as I can tell.

They didn't find a gun and tenant Mr Green was released, because (he assures me) he didn't do any shooting.

Him and his girlfriend have now been moved into a council house in another area and due to the feud/rivalry with this other business, the police really have warned him to stay away from the house because there's still someone out there with a gun that doesn't like him much.

So, nevermind about potential loss of a tenant/rent etc, the thing that concerns me most is the damage to my property. Why should I have to pay £200 for a bit of board and another few hundred (at least) on top of that for a new front door and lock when it seems that the police had the wrong man and didn't find anything? How can I appeal against this invoice from the company employed by the police to board up the door?

[HistoricCoinage 146]

Sorry to hear that you're having to go through all this, Chris. I do hope it gets rectified soon.

I'd advise you to read through this, specifically the last part where they state "As a general rule, compensation for damage caused after a lawful search will not be paid." I'd advise contacting a solicitor, although I suspect you've had enough with them after your Lighthouse fiasco.

Good luck!

[argentumandcoins 70]

Sorry to hear that you're having to go through all this, Chris. I do hope it gets rectified soon.

I'd advise you to read through this, specifically the last part where they state "As a general rule, compensation for damage caused after a lawful search will not be paid." I'd advise contacting a solicitor, although I suspect you've had enough with them after your Lighthouse fiasco.

Good luck!

That's Tayside Clive, different legislation North of the border.

English Forces will normally only pay where they have made an error eg wrong house, wrong door, did not attempt to contact keyholder etc etc.

[HistoricCoinage 146]

That's Tayside Clive, different legislation North of the border.

Ah, my bad. Hopefully it's not applicable, then!

(P.S. Good to see your old man lives in Durham, a wonderful part of the world! )

[Peter 615]

Sorry to hear that you're having to go through all this, Chris. I do hope it gets rectified soon.

I'd advise you to read through this, specifically the last part where they state "As a general rule, compensation for damage caused after a lawful search will not be paid." I'd advise contacting a solicitor, although I suspect you've had enough with them after your Lighthouse fiasco.

Good luck!

Don't contact a Solicitor for a £200 problem....that is about an hours worth

Kick them out and take it from their deposit?

[azda 979]

I'd be more concerned for the next tennant if the shooter thinks the previous is still there :-/

[azda 979]

Sorry to hear that you're having to go through all this, Chris. I do hope it gets rectified soon.

I'd advise you to read through this, specifically the last part where they state "As a general rule, compensation for damage caused after a lawful search will not be paid." I'd advise contacting a solicitor, although I suspect you've had enough with them after your Lighthouse fiasco.

Good luck!

That's Tayside Clive, different legislation North of the border.

English Forces will normally only pay where they have made an error eg wrong house, wrong door, did not attempt to contact keyholder etc etc.

What i don't get though is, if the keyholder was already in custody of his own free will, why was there the need to smash the door down?

[HistoricCoinage 146]

What i don't get though is, if the keyholder was already in custody of his own free will, why was there the need to smash the door down?

Perhaps because they couldn't be sure whether the house was empty of other occupants and with the possibility of a weapon inside surprise was the best tactic. John will be better placed to answer.