Dodgy tenant

[Pancake]

Its amazing the way that free speech gets trampled on on this web site even when it was ment not to be,and said to be, not racist.I would still like to know the outcome of that thread and how it is progresssing.....Lets keep it going......

[Cat]

The thread was removed for the attention of the forum owners, as it contained allegations and incitements to actions that many people were not happy with.

Fil knows that there are lots of people interested in how things are going for her, and hoping for a good outcome, and that of course she is free to post an update of her situation to the forum.  As she hasn't yet posted any more news you could always pm her if you want to catch up on her story Pancake.

The only thing that we ask is that everyone abides by the forum code of conduct.

[Beryl]

But it did contain a lot of useful information and advice. To remove the whole thread seems to be like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Can't it just be pruned a bit and reinstated ?

[Quillan]

[quote user="beryl"]But it did contain a lot of useful information and advice. To remove the whole thread seems to be like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Can't it just be pruned a bit and reinstated ?[/quote]

This is now out of the moderators hands and like you we are waiting to hear (or see) what is going to happen. You can always contact Forum Admin if you are not happy.

[Fil]

Hi Pancake, and everyone else who would like to keep up with this thread!

As you know, the thread got closed, rather sadly.  I have had lots of supportive PM's including one saying it was the most interesting thread on the forum at the moment, so I gather, from the number of hits it had when it was locked, there must be lots of you out there wanting to know what is happening! 

Now, be warned, do NOT come anywhere close to breaching the code of conduct, as we do not want this thread closing a second time!  If you have any controversial opinions to offer, please pm me, then I will give you my own email, and you can say them there!  However, please do not bother if they incite violence or anything illegal, as, I think you will all have noted, I don't agree with any of that, and neither does my other half!  We both want everything done nicely and within the law!

Update on the situation with the Sponger (I assume it is alright to give him this nickname as I am not allowed to name him?).

No sign of him.  We got a note added to our EDF account (as suggested by someone in the locked thread but can't remember who it was and can't look back to see) and now, should he try to activate it, we will be contacted, and should have to sign for it.  Hooray!  Thankyou thankyou thankyou, whoever you were - that was one of the soundest ideas yet!  And it worked!  We were allowed to do it!

The house stands empty.  Facing us across our drive, annoying us still, as we can't touch it.  Our gate is kept locked, and the OH is still refusing to go off to visit his poor sick Dad in the UK because he is afraid to leave me here on my own.

Someone in the old thread suggested my friend (she with the awkward mum and step dad, who perhaps should be known as Snow White in reverse) might have renovated her garage illegally.  No.  Everything was done by the law, inspected etc, and incidentally, it was her OH who signed all applications for the building, the fosse etc, thinking it was their house.  Only to have the rug pulled out from under their feet.  So that is the update on her.  She is still there, but they are looking for a house to do up, as he is a registered maçon over here, again, perfectly legally, declaring everything, Siret number etc.  We sometimes wonder if we are the only ones round here doing things legally - no-one else seems to be!  But that is probably just the impression we get when we are feeling frustrated!

Now, several things I would like advice on.

How does one go about finding out if the Sponger did get into trouble for drink driving (again) whilst without his permis?  Is it possible to find this out or not?  We think, but are not sure, that he did, on Monday 12th Feb, in Rennes.  Surely there must be a record of this?  But how do we find out?  You see, when the gendarmes told us that he had lost his permis, they said that if he got caught again, he would be going to jail, and this would effect us very much.  So we do need to know, especially in view of the fact he has not shown his face now for 15 days! 

Getting our money back.  The huissier said that through him we would have to apply to the Tribunal d'Instance.  Is this the only small claims court available?  I assume it is, but don't know.  Is it the equivalent of the Small Claims Court in the UK?  At the moment the Huissier is just putting in place steps to get him out and recuperate our house, as he said that if we included the money in this it could take even longer!  However, should he go, we would like to know just how to get the actual money back!  As we could do with it, not being filthy rich, as so many are perceived to be over here.  Also, the money represents a principle, does it not?  Why should his debt to us be ignored?  He has, after all, signed a contract to the effect that he is promising to pay us each month for something we have lent him, and he has reneged on that.  You would not expect to hire a car for example, and have the bill waived because you had spent your money on something else!  (I know that car rental is usually protected by being based on your credit card, but this is just an example).

The house is our posession, which we have invested our hard earned money into, and which we are now using to produce an income on which to live.  He has deprived us of this right to an income by his behaviour.  Not only has he deprived us of the income he should be paying us himself, for the hire of our posession, but he looks like depriving us of the income we might be getting in the near future.  Because we have at some time in the past posessed sufficient money to buy a property in France for ourselves and without a mortgage, we are now deemed as rich.  The posession of the property is deemed to be our wealth, and therefore, in posessing something of value, we are deemed to be able to afford to lose the income from it.  The Huissier informed us that he once heard a judge tell a proprietor that as he owned the house, he therefore did not need the money from the rent!  The Huissier himself thought this was bad, and you can imagine our faces when he told us this.  So the fact that we might end up in front of a judge who would see us as the oppressor of a poor young man (ignoring the fact that he has proved himself a drunken liar) is rather worrying.

It has been suggested that my OH (having good negotiating skills) should ring up the family and discuss the situation with them.  His french is fine for listening and understanding, but for speaking it is not nearly so good (I am the family gas bag as you may have realised), and besides, when we have tried to do this in the past, we have been hung up on, the mother disclaiming all responsibility for her wayward son.  Although she is happy to lend him her car, let him driver her handicapped son about(knowing he is an alcoholic, as it was she that said that to me not me to her), and even to settle his debt in December for him!  We are not in a negotiating situation here, I am afraid.  We can now only hope that the huissier will take on that roll, but as he is calling on our gite, he is not finding the culprit in residence! 

I will endeavour to keep everyone up to date on this, but at the moment nothing is happening, other than a waiting game being played.  The Huissier has applied to the court for the 9th of March, so we will see what happens then.  However, should anything occur before then, I will post an update on here.

Now, remember, no naughty suggestions!  Behave yourselves, whatever you are thinking!  You can think what you like, or email me personally and say, but do NOT post it on here! 

Thankyou again for all your support!

Fil

 

[Lori]

Thanks for that update Fil.  Continued good luck to you.

 

[darnsarf]

It really depends on what you mean by free speech. A forum like this is managed by a commercial organisation and forum members get to use it for free. If that commercial organisation sees things being said or actions invited which could be outside the law, then it is not unreasonable for the organisation to protect its interests by setting a balance between so-called free speech (the right to say anything at all) and it's potential exposure as the publisher of such comments.

Similarly popularity alone (page views) shouldn't be taken as support per se and interest may not always be healthy. A public hanging may well be very popular (i.e. lots of spectators) but very few people would actually see it as a civilised thing to do.

Although I was interested in the thread, I fully supported the Moderators' decision to delete it given what I felt to be, some unsavoury comments.

Whilst Fil's situation is very far from unique in the property letting world, it is useful to understand the legitimate processes that are involved to eject a tenant when the terms of the agreement have been broken. If the content could be kept within that framework, rather than veering towards sniping and vengeance, I'm still interested in hearing the outcome.

[Sunday Driver]

How does one go about finding out if the Sponger did get into trouble for drink driving (again) whilst without his permis? 

Why would you want to do this?  If he has left the house, just get on with your life.

Getting our money back.

From reading this saga, you're unlikely to get any money out of him, so just write it off as a business loss.  Happens all the time.

The house is our posession, which we have invested our hard earned money into, and which we are now using to produce an income on which to live.

When you decided to use the house to produce an income for yourselves, it became a business asset with all the risks associated with such a business venture.  You entered into a contract with this individual and he breached it.  Happens all the time.

It has been suggested that my OH (having good negotiating skills) should ring up the family and discuss the situation with them.

Your contract is with the individual and his mother/family have no legal obligation to mitigate your business losses.  You say she has hung up on you before, so now that he's not even living in your property, I suspect you'll get no further response from her.

Up until now, you have adopted a wholly emotional approach to your business problem, but you are at last realising that the legal route is working for you.  Equally, you need to recognise its limitations. 

 

[Patf]

I too was going to say  that you're not likely to get any money from him. I don't know how the bankruptcy laws in France and UK compare, but we lost a lot of money in UK when a tenant went bankrupt and we were way down off the list of those who got paid a little. I think the Inland Revenue comes first. As SD says, happens all the time.Pat.

[Llwyncelyn]

Patf as you say the Crown comes first in the UK they have what they call common law powers and they can just about do what they like.  Of course TB and to encourage investment and new businesses has introduced a law which says that after bankruptcy one can get out relatively unscathed within one year.  A few years ago it used to be five (if I can remember that far back)

[Fil]

Hi, again,

he turned up today and took a load of his things!  Hooray!  But not, alas all of them.  We were eating lunch and only spotted him by chance as our kitchen is at the back of the house.  We watched, hoping it would be the lot, but it was almost all, but not quite, and no sign of the return of the key.  Hmmm.

Why the heck should I write off his debt please?  Even if he only pays me a bit at a time, I am determined to get it.  It is our right to have it paid, surely?  What earthly reason can there be to not go after it, other than that it might cost loads to do so.  Obviously, throwing good money after bad is not a good idea, but can I pursue him with little cost to myself or not?  I am not sure if this is possible. 

By the way, as he is moving his things, and as he told our agent he was having job interviews, we think he has another job, which would mean he could afford to pay us, so why should he be allowed to get away with it?

Fil

[Clair]

"We think, but are not sure, that he [did get into trouble for drink driving (again) whilst without his permis], on Monday 12th Feb, in Rennes"

"we might end up in front of a judge who would see us as the oppressor of a poor young man"

"we think he has another job, which would mean he could afford to pay us"

You're speculating again. You don't actually know.

[Fil]

Hi,

er, why should I not speculate?  Is one not allowed to?  Surely, alot of life is based on speculation and wondering if something will happen.  There are many things one does not know, and wonders about.  I am speculating because the forum is in the nature of a conversation, and speculation plays a huge part in conversation.  eg "I wonder if .....?"  "Perhaps I might ...........?" "If I do X then Y might happen and that would be nice/nasty". 

I think I am entitled to wonder what is going on, when no-one bothers to tell me.

Fil

[Quillan]

I think I would have changed the locks and when he could not get in and came to me I would have asked for my rent. If he had a problem I would have let him take me to court. That way, as I understand it, he will have to pay the costs if he looses but then you counter sue anyway. If he does not bother then after 6 months I would sell his stuff and keep the money for the rent. Any left over I would then forward to him. I don't know how legal it would be but in his precarious position he can hardly complain. I wounder if he drove to collect his things?

I think you would be best to keep things 100% factual mind because if he goes to court and you have got some of it wrong you could look very silly and he could get away with it.

[Clair]

[quote]... er, why should I not speculate?  Is one not allowed to?  Surely,

alot of life is based on speculation and wondering if something will

happen.  There are many things one does not know, and wonders about.  I

am speculating because the forum is in the nature of a conversation,

and speculation plays a huge part in conversation.  eg "I wonder

if .....?"  "Perhaps I might ...........?" "If I do X then Y might

happen and that would be nice/nasty". 

I think I am entitled to wonder what is going on, when no-one bothers to tell me.Fil[/quote]

The difference between a conversation and a forum is that the written word stays to be read long after the conversation is forgotten, which is why the previous thread had to be pulled.

This person has defaulted on his rent. It's a failed business transaction, not a personal vandetta, unless you choose to make it so.

Your posts are not factual, they're full of speculation and I suspect that, in spite of yourself, part of you is enjoying the drama and the attention.

[Bugsy]

I can't believe this one-sided farce is still on here, I'm even more suprised that I've just looked at it again.

Life is just too short for this, IMHO,

I'm gone...................................[:(]

..

[Teamedup]

Out of order there Clair. That is not on at all.

[Turnip]

[quote user="Clair"][quote]... er, why should I not speculate?  Is one not allowed to?  Surely, alot of life is based on speculation and wondering if something will happen.  There are many things one does not know, and wonders about.  I am speculating because the forum is in the nature of a conversation, and speculation plays a huge part in conversation.  eg "I wonder if .....?"  "Perhaps I might ...........?" "If I do X then Y might happen and that would be nice/nasty". 

I think I am entitled to wonder what is going on, when no-one bothers to tell me.Fil[/quote]

The difference between a conversation and a forum is that the written word stays to be read long after the conversation is forgotten, which is why the previous thread had to be pulled.
This person has defaulted on his rent. It's a failed business transaction, not a personal vandetta, unless you choose to make it so.
Your posts are not factual, they're full of speculation and I suspect that, in spite of yourself, part of you is enjoying the drama and the attention.[/quote]

Whose speculating now and adding to the drama[8-)]

[Llwyncelyn]

Claire I have come to this late and perhaps I should stay well away.  However I do have problems with this forum with the ability to say what one means.  Indeed you have seen many of my previous postings on the subject and I think there is an arguable case that Archant Life very well know what is likely to happen and thus any reasonable organisation should be prepared.  You cannot in such matters have a sterile approach?

As to a failed business transaction I make no bones about the fact that the contributor dealt with a fellow and so-called 'human being' it was not a failed business transaction it was a transaction between two individuals and with one 'allegedly failing to keep to his side of the bargain'  One can only generalise but surely we must be able to voice our deeply held opinions on such matters.

However I do agree that we are now seeing chapter and verse and epilogues and whatever and does this add anything..................I am not sure in that the contributor has with respect seen a multitude of responses and the way is now forward for he or she to resolve the problem.  Again the story is beginning to become stale and is now not front page but lost in the inside pages.

I am not being disrespectful (I sincerely hope not) but perhaps it is time to let matters evolve.

Finally I wish to return to the question of a 'failed business transaction'  Strictly speaking not a failed transaction but I represented a client in the Court of Appeal and who was forced on the evidence of the complainant to make good the alleged loss of the complainant.  I argued until blue in the face that the valuation was from Mars and Her Majesty's Justices sent me away with a flea in my ear........not for the first time.

The guy obtained betterment and that is not allowed in UK law.  We all felt so strongly that after (and yes we paid the compensation) we moved to the Civil Courts and argued betterment with that division.  We won served warrants and I have just made the guy bankrupt.  Is that a personal vendetta.  If you believe in something fight for it.

Not that I need plaudits but I acted on a pro bono basis a wrong is a wrong wherever it occurs and I say that within the bounds of reason it is unfair to fetter comments in this forum and I will now finally say goodbye and to wish everyone well.  I have promised before but this time I will deliver.

 

[Russethouse]

Well, perhaps I might speculate here ? From what Fil says it looks more probable than it did, that this chap will be out of the property in question by the 28th Feb which was the agreed date.

So its possible that the gite (I assume with changed locks) will be rentable in time for the first lot of holiday makers.

Then we have the matter of the owing rent - well Fil could pursue him and she may get an order against him for repayment. From everything she has said he has no assets but may be getting a job, it seems  he is hardly going to be on a top salary so its likely that he will be given time to pay or ordered to pay small amounts on a regular basis. The likelihood (speculating again) is that he will default, possibly resulting in a spell in jail, but still no money. Of course he might also get the sack - still no money.

Fil, please consider doing yourself a favour, concentrate on getting the gite back, getting it ready for your guests and your family and forget this chap. Don't let him take up your time and drag you down.

Edit: Llwyncelyn  - given there was an agent involved how is it possible for it NOT to be a business transaction ?

[Sunday Driver]

Sorry, but this was a straightforward business transaction.  Gites are business assets, not personal living spaces which you condescend to allow only nice respectable people to occupy.

The rental contract provided for the gite to be made available for this stranger to live in and the consideration was the rent he agreed to pay.  That's all it was.  He didn't have to smell nice or refrain from drinking whilst driving.  All he had to do was pay the rent.  He didn't, so it's a straightforward legal case of breach of contract.

As RH says, you've more important things to do than waste your time and money chasing non-existant euros.

 

[Mpprh]

Hi

I spent quite some time going back through my files to contribute to the original thread.

It was me who suggested you could control the EDF account. Having been down this way myself (unlike other posters), it is a pity that we can't look back at the other parts of my experience - as  posted on the deleted thread.

Forget revenge, retribution, an eye for a eye, etc. If you get him out it is a result.

It is isn't finished yet. He is barely past the start of the legal remedies available to him. Potentially he can cause you much trouble and delay. The current position is that he is a poor Frenchman who has fallen behind with his rent - you are the wealthy foreigner wanting to make a killing out of wealthy tourists.

The authorities will help him because it is easier than finding him alternative accommodation.

Stay legal, use the Huissier, and let's hope you eventually get rid of him. Have patience, and just take one step at a time.

I know that is easy to say, but I wish I had had that advice.

This may sound alarmist. My dodgy tenant told the court that he had to move out (he was evicted by the gendarmes - conveniently forgotten and not raised in  court) because the premises were insalubrious, and asked the court to decide that I had to pay for alternative accommodation. It  was insalubrious - he had made it that way as a squatter. Actually, he didn't appear - the free avocat available to those on RMI did.

Never take court decisions for granted. Avoid court hearings if you can.

You can mail me here : [email protected] for private advice.

Peter

[Frederick]

 

From my experience  I  would follow  Sunday Drivers advice on this .....its not worth going after the money its too much hassle . I was awarded none paid  rent owed by a UK court ....to be paid back at a fiver a time .....I got two postal orders ...then it stopped .....I think it would have cost me more in time and petrol to go and cash them in at the Post Office .....I didnt bother in the end . 

[Renaud]

Llwyncelyn - your contributions to this forum have always thoughtful and interesting. Sorry to see you go, I hope not for long.

[Georgina]

[quote user="Clair"][quote]... er, why should I not speculate?  Is one not allowed to?  Surely, alot of life is based on speculation and wondering if something will happen.  There are many things one does not know, and wonders about.  I am speculating because the forum is in the nature of a conversation, and speculation plays a huge part in conversation.  eg "I wonder if .....?"  "Perhaps I might ...........?" "If I do X then Y might happen and that would be nice/nasty". 

I think I am entitled to wonder what is going on, when no-one bothers to tell me.Fil[/quote]

The difference between a conversation and a forum is that the written word stays to be read long after the conversation is forgotten, which is why the previous thread had to be pulled.
This person has defaulted on his rent. It's a failed business transaction, not a personal vandetta, unless you choose to make it so.
Your posts are not factual, they're full of speculation and I suspect that, in spite of yourself, part of you is enjoying the drama and the attention.[/quote]

Objection!!! mi' lord.  This person needs some help and confirmation of what to do next.  Not an ear bashing for being worried.

Georgina