You try getting the police to prosecute, they won't they will say it is a civil dispute.

You are stuffed,  I am afraid, the best you can so is if you have contents insurance claim on it.

You can use all the deposit though it is probably nowhere near enough to cover things.

Been through it all myself, wasted my time and money and police reports etc.

Forget pursuing things. you register a CCJ to hopefully muck their credit file up and that is about it.

Don't bother wasting too much of your time, especially if they are benefit claimants.

It is pointless pursuing these types as you will never get anything from them.

Had you RGI you would not have problem, if they don't go it will take months to evict them.

Hope you have enogh to pay the mortgage otherwise property repossessed and you made bankrupt.

The first few paragraphs of the criminal damage act define criminal damage.  There is no caveat concerning contracts such as an AST converting criminal damage into a civil offence.

If I were to hire a car and then slash the seats it would I believe be criminal damage.  The same applies to a tenant with an AST agreement.  Universally the police try to claim wanton damage is a civil offence if there is an AST in place but I believe (and so does my criminal lawyer advisor) that it is still criminal damage.

1.-(1) A person who without lawful excuse destroys or
damages any property belonging to another intending to destroy or damaging
or damage any such property or being reckless as to whether property.
any such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be
guilty of an offence.
(2) A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages
any property, whether belonging to himself or another-
(a) intending to destroy or damage any property or being
reckless as to whether any property would be destroyed
or damaged ; and
(b) intending by the destruction or damage to endanger the
life of another or being reckless as to whether the life
of another would be thereby endangered ;
shall be guilty of an offence.
(3) An offence committed under this section by destroying
or damaging property by fire shall be charged as arson.

It is about time that the criminal damage act is enforced.

Surely it is in the public interest to prosecute ANY tenant who causes criminal damage  or theft at a property for which they have an AST.

Just like the squatting law is due to be changed, albeit only for residential property then so should enforcement of tenant criminal damage  at tenanted properties should be prosecuted.

I suspect there is actually a prejudice against residential LL in that the powers that be are very relaxed about tenants ripping off LL.

There always seems to be an idea that LL should bear all the consequences of the actions of their tenants without much redress achievable.

As has been suggested in other criminal damage situations arrests would certainly occur.

Therefore perhaps a petition insisting that police take action against tenants committing criminal damage and theft.

To allow the police to get away with arresting and applying for prosecution of these tenants is an aberration.

Are we as citizens or rather in the UK as subjects, not protected by the criminal damage act like any other UK subject.

It seems defacto LL by the nature of their business are excluded from the protection of the state and therefore have to bear the costs of their tenant's criminal actions.

Is this not a breach of our human rights as LL.

Insurance companies have a lot to answer for aswell.

They should pay out if there is the insured risk to be claimed on.

How can insurance companies be allowed to not pay out when there is a legitimate claim.

Surely breach of contract!?

Tom said
My current girlfriend has just had her rented flat destroyed by an ex-boyfriend whose name was not on the tenancy agreement and was on the property without permission. She has not been at the flat for a while out of fear of bumping into him but the police have been involved and are saying that even though the damage wasn't caused by her she will have to pay, which I think is totally bonkers. can anyone give me any advice? 

Hi Tom,

I'm not a solicitor so cannot give legal advice only my opinion.

If she called the Police straight away to say he forced entry to the property, is on the premises and should be arrested then she should be OK, however I think it's unlikely she will have done this. If she didn't call the police then he may be deemed to have been there with permission as she gave him a key or let him in. Her tenancy agreement will state in all likelihood that your gf is responsible for the actions of her 'guests.' So if he doesn't fix these things by the end of the tenancy or when the Landlord notices then she will be responsible to pay to have them fixed.

That doesn't mean you can kick doors in etc and get away scott free. The ex's damage needs to be reported to police and he can be sued and imprisoned (if the police do their job properly). If your ex ends up paying the Landlord for the damage then she has incurred a loss which she can sue the ex for. I suggest she takes photos and other evidence to protect her.

I know you think it's bonkers but the Landlord doesn't know who damaged the property and only has her word against his and I doubt he'd admit it. Also if she didn't let him have access to the property then he couldn't damage it so she bears some responsibility for this. If he overpowered her or broke into the house then providing she reported him to the police and asked to have him arrested then that's a different story.

The last piece of the puzzle is if he admits to it, the ex may be fined £50 less than the damage cost. So the rule to learn us never let anyone into your house you don't know or could be violent. Shop owners get this frequently. Shop window smashed offender caught, gets fined less than the window cost. Shop has to replace window at their own cost and shares your opinion (it's not fair) or claims on their insurance and has to pay £250 of their insurance excess (still not fair!)

I'd check if she took out home insurance as it may cover the cost or pay the legal costs if suing the ex.

Not a nice situation, good luck.