A landlord who illegally evicted a family of nine has been fined £700.
He has also been ordered to pay costs of £1,500 and a victim surcharge of £70 after he took matters into his own hands and ignored the two-month notice his agent had given the tenants.
When they were out, Mirsad Solakovic, of Birmingham, changed the locks.
Solakovic, 37, was found guilty of unlawfully evicting the family in contravention of Section 1(2) of The Protection from Eviction Act 1977, on October 2, 2013.
Solakovic had asked his tenants to leave without serving the appropriate notice. Birmingham City Council wrote to the agent who was managing the property at the time outlining the legal procedure to be followed to obtain possession.
Although the agent had served a new notice giving the tenant two months to leave, Solakovic decided to act.
When one of the sons living at the property came home later that day he discovered the locks had been changed and called the police.
Solakovic refused to let the tenants back in, allowing just one family member to enter and retrieve a few belongings.
He then crammed the rest into the garage.
Birmingham City Council’s cabinet member for neighbourhood management and homes, Cllr John Cotton, said: “When relationships break down between tenants and landlords there are strict legal processes that have to be followed.
“The prosecution sends out a clear message that we will not tolerate this behaviour and will pursue those landlords who operate outside the law.”
This article serves no purpose without the back story.
We’re they in arrears, noisy, trashing the joint?
Or were they good Tenants?
Were they benefits or private?
Would they have been forced to go to eviction if benefits?
£2,270 doesn’t seem to much of a deterrent to stop others doing it
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
What does it matter? The point is that the landlord did not follow the legal process for regaining possession of his property (which he’s entitled to do if he wishes, and without giving a reason). In my opinion he got off extremely lightly. As you say, not much of a deterrent.
I had a client perform an illegal eviction, albeit unintentionally, back in the early 1990s. He ended up paying damages to the tenant of some £30,000. Apparently this was calculated by the difference in value of the property with and without sitting tenants.
In terms of deterrents, we seem to have gone from one extreme to another.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
It matters quite a lot.
I’ve had landlords in my office threatening every conceivable criminal act to get their tenants out, not one has ever followed through (thankfully!)
For this guy to do what he has done and probably being aware of the consequences something must of been seriously wrong.
The ‘why’ here is very important. Yes he broke the law, but why did he break the law, we only have half a story.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
It doesn’tt matter what the story is, a landlord cannot change the locks or kick out a tenant, period. As a judge said at hearing I was at the other day, landlords may feel aggrieved but they must accept they will always run the risk of getting a bad tenant sooner or latter and have to accept it and do the right thing and get a court order.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register