The Law's an Ass

[cashman]

Originally Posted by Bonnyboy

Where does it say in that report that the convicted bloke was still paying his rent ?

well it don't say that the way i read it so guess you n i have been topped by a legal mind.

[blazey]

As for the rent still being paid, I read it on another website but for the claim to succeed he would have had to have abided by his contract anyway, tenancy contracts are generally pretty solid in that respect, so he must have been paying otherwise there isn't a chance he would have got anyone to represent him in court.

Chances are he is on a no win no fee basis, and solicitors taking on these claims have a specific risk assessment and generally if there is a less than 61% chance of success they wont take on the case. If he hadn't been paying there wouldn't be anywhere near that high a chance of success. I can't find the page I read it on now but I'll trying to find it.

Here is the page that said he used public money to fund his case though, implying legal aid. Rapist Sues Landlady From Jail; Wins Damages

[blazey]

Originally Posted by cashman

well it don't say that the way i read it so guess you n i have been topped by a legal mind.

Sorry, I googled the story to see if the story was different anywhere else and I can't find the one it was now, but I still stand by my convictions because there is no chance anyone would represent him if he had breached the contract.

If he had breached the contract she would've been well within her rights and he wouldn't have been successful. Anyone living in rented property should be aware of these general rights though and they are available on the government website, she wouldn't have even had to seek legal advice to know she wasn't legally able to do that. She admits herself that she should have got legal advice before doing it.

[Royboy39]

Originally Posted by Royboy39

Do you think a convicted burgler should have to pay back what he stole and a black mark should be registered against his name until he paid back the debt and that baliffs should hound him until he has paid.....I do.

The law really is an ass.....I have watched over the years these Baliff programmes and taken on board how much they earn for chasing parking offenders.....who gives a toss if you park in the wrong place?
Does this help you and I as taxpayers.........no I don't think it does.
Target the criminals.....Tag them, make them pay for the rest of their lives for the crimes they have commited. We are too soft with offenders and the victim suffers all the time.
Put them on a register not only as an offender but as a debter to the individual they offended against.
Lets see how much the overpaid briefs make out of that?

[blazey]

Do people realise she did this before he was actually convicted? He hadn't even been put on trial for the crime before she removed his things, he was just in custody.

What if he had been found not guilty and come home to his flat empty? If he had been found innocent people would be thinking completely different about this, but I don't think like that because I think everyone should be treated equally under the law, not rapist vs 'good citizen'.

I think the decision makes sense but I can't be bothered arguing about it any further because it wont change my mind and it probably wont change yours, and it certainly wont change the decision!

[WillowTheWhisp]

So how long was she supposed to wait with an empty flat and food going off in the fridge due to the power supply not being on? Should she just leave it like that ad infinitum?

[cashman]

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

So how long was she supposed to wait with an empty flat and food going off in the fridge due to the power supply not being on? Should she just leave it like that ad infinitum?

well it looks like according to the law,a bloody long time,which brings us back to the thread title- The Laws an Ass.

[blazey]

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

So how long was she supposed to wait with an empty flat and food going off in the fridge due to the power supply not being on? Should she just leave it like that ad infinitum?

If you google it some of them say what she did wrong. She should have gone to the court and claimed possession of the property, then legally she would have been able to empty it.

She's paying for a mistake basically but unfortunately there is that little point of the law that ignorance is not a defense. I'm not saying that this is necessarily fair, but it stops people taking advantage of the law, and in respect of landlords being able to empty your home of all your belongings as they wish I'm glad that they didn't let her off otherwise other landlords might decide to do the same in favour of a more desireable occupant and that would be much more serious than this.
He only won £750 or something anyway, he wont see the penny of the fee's she's having to pay so it isn't like he is going to be rolling in wealth when he gets out of prison. Blame the solicitors for the high fee's she's having to pay!

[churchman phil]

Originally Posted by blazey

What if he had been found not guilty and come home to his flat empty? If he had been found innocent people would be thinking completely different about this, but I don't think like that because I think everyone should be treated equally under the law, not rapist vs 'good citizen'.

His stuff was in storage. I'm sure he'd have easily found somewhere else to live.....unless he would've had to disclose the fact that he was a serial rapist.
Oh! But he doesn't have to do that does he 'cos that would probably infringe his rights to privacy or something. So any prospective landlord/lady could be left in the same predicament.

In fact, do modern rental agreements have a provision for disclosure of criminal convictions?? If not, should they?? The lady in the article states that if she'd known she wouldn't have let to him due to girls working in the salon below. Ergo - would he then have been in breach of contract for not being truthful????

As always with stories like this, we, the general public, are only really told the basics for the story. If every little thing was disclosed then maybe we would think differently. However, the man WAS convicted TO LIFE and should therefore lose all privileges. His belongings should be sold to pay for his costs in the original case.

Until such time a political party actually takes the bull by the horns and says enough of the 'softly, softly' approach with the criminal element of the country then I stand by the title of this thread regarding this story - THE LAW IS AN ASS.

[blazey]

Originally Posted by churchman phil

His stuff was in storage. I'm sure he'd have easily found somewhere else to live.....unless he would've had to disclose the fact that he was a serial rapist.
Oh! But he doesn't have to do that does he 'cos that would probably infringe his rights to privacy or something. So any prospective landlord/lady could be left in the same predicament.

In fact, do modern rental agreements have a provision for disclosure of criminal convictions?? If not, should they?? The lady in the article states that if she'd known she wouldn't have let to him due to girls working in the salon below. Ergo - would he then have been in breach of contract for not being truthful????

As always with stories like this, we, the general public, are only really told the basics for the story. If every little thing was disclosed then maybe we would think differently. However, the man WAS convicted TO LIFE and should therefore lose all privileges. His belongings should be sold to pay for his costs in the original case.

Until such time a political party actually takes the bull by the horns and says enough of the 'softly, softly' approach with the criminal element of the country then I stand by the title of this thread regarding this story - THE LAW IS AN ASS.

I live in rented property and I could easily be arrested on suspicion of a crime by mistake. I'd hate to think my landlady could empty my home and rent it out to someone else when I haven't breached my contract.

This decision was clearly based on that idea and to stop the possible creation of a loophole in tenancy agreements. Why is this story not in decent newspapers? Because the only point of the story is that he is a rapist, not the law at all.

Also, she is the one that broke the law in this case, not him. If the decision was based on him being a rapist it would almost be like double jeopardy.

[churchman phil]

Mrs Goymer said she will also have to spend thousands of pounds renovating and decorating her property.

"The flat was in a terrible state," she said.

"There was no electricity on, so all the food in the fridge and freezer had gone off.

"It looked as though someone had done a runner and left everything there."

If it looked like he'd done a runner then how was she supposed to know he was in jail/custody??

Mrs Goymer said she checked out her tenant's references before he moved in.

It later came to light he was first jailed for rape in 1976 and has further convictions for rape, attempted rape and indecent assault.

See the disclosure bit in my last post but he obviously neglected to say "I'm a convicted Rapist".

Have you been previously convicted of a crime Blazey?? I would think not (though I may be mistaken - who knows!!)

Therefore your landlord would have no reason to worry over mistaken identity would he/she? Therefore why would they see the need to evict you?? Esp. as I'm sure you'd be on the phone to reassure them it was a mistake and it would be all sorted soon.

We could go on all night picking holes in each others reasoning but at the end of it all this case highlights THE LAW IS AN ASS!!!!

[emamum]

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

There is nothing saying he was or wasn't paying his rent, but it sounds like he certainly wasn't paying his gas and electric bills. Was she supposed to pay those for him? She didn't chuck his belongings away. He can have those back when he comes out of jail. Perhaps she should send him the bill for storage which she has been paying at a rate of £60 per month.

he should be happy with that, £60 a month is probably cheaper than his rent! he wont have any problems finding somewhere to live when he gets out,the council will rehome him.....

[WillowTheWhisp]

Originally Posted by blazey

Also, she is the one that broke the law in this case, not him. If the decision was based on him being a rapist it would almost be like double jeopardy.

It's nothing like Double Jeopardy!

Originally Posted by emamum23

he should be happy with that, £60 a month is probably cheaper than his rent! he wont have any problems finding somewhere to live when he gets out,the council will rehome him.....

Absolutely! It's not as if she sold his stuff or just chucked it out on the street. If and when he gets out of prison (life? Ha! Don't make me laugh!) it's all still there for him AT HER EXPENSE!

[cashman]

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

It's nothing like Double Jeopardy!



Absolutely! It's not as if she sold his stuff or just chucked it out on the street. If and when he gets out of prison (life? Ha! Don't make me laugh!) it's all still there for him AT HER EXPENSE!

ha but thats the way it should be, blaze says so.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by cashman

ha but thats the way it should be, blaze says so.

You mean to say blazey's never wrong cashy