we can't both be correct

jeffwebb36

There is something strange going on My tenant and myself disagreed how many extra days notice he is entitled to by way of the covid allowances. Anyway nothing new so far, but here it gets strange. I contacted the RTB and they told me i am correct, and i sent my tenant a letter showing that the RTB are on my side. Instead of believing me my tenant contacted the RTB and they told him he is correct. Then the same process was repeated and repeated. Then I pointed out the legislation is easy enough so a RTB rep should be able to understand so they should make their minds..I even suggested that despite knowing i am correct i would prefer if they took my tenant's side rather than take both sides. The RTB said the decision should go to mediation which struck me as a waste of time because the mediator might say both me and my tenant are correct.Anyway the question has to be asked
The RTB must know who is right and who is wrong so they must be lying to one of us. So are the RTB stupid or are they corrupt?

davindub

jeffwebb36 wrote: »

There is something strange going on My tenant and myself disagreed how many extra days notice he is entitled to by way of the covid allowances. Anyway nothing new so far, but here it gets strange. I contacted the RTB and they told me i am correct, and i sent my tenant a letter showing that the RTB are on my side. Instead of believing me my tenant contacted the RTB and they told him he is correct. Then the same process was repeated and repeated. Then I pointed out the legislation is easy enough so a RTB rep should be able to understand so they should make their minds..I even suggested that despite knowing i am correct i would prefer if they took my tenant's side rather than take both sides. The RTB said the decision should go to mediation which struck me as a waste of time because the mediator might say both me and my tenant are correct.Anyway the question has to be asked
The RTB must know who is right and who is wrong so they must be lying to one of us. So are the RTB stupid or are they corrupt?

RTB don't give advisory, so I guess take any advice given should be taken as someone trying to help you understand the legislation the best they can, rather than a pre determination of any case.

The person may be incorrect, but not his/ her job so I would say neither stupid or corrupt.

jeffwebb36

davindub wrote: »

RTB don't give advisory, so I guess take any advice given should be taken as someone trying to help you understand the legislation the best they can, rather than a pre determination of any case.

The person may be incorrect, but not his/ her job so I would say neither stupid or corrupt.

I never said the RTB should make a decision I said they advertise that they give advice, and giving known to be false advice is corrupt, if they do not know the answer they should say so. If a LL believes/trusts the advice given to him by the RTB and acts accordingly and decides to go for mediation then when the mediation happens he discovers the RTB gave the other side different advice he would not be happy. Also believing a dishonest or incompetent RTB agent could cost (by way of delaying eviction due to bad RTB advice) thousands in the way of lost rent.
Let us look at an example of similar scenario an accident helpline tells one of the parties involved in an accident he would win if the matter goes to court, and then tells the opposing person he would win if the matter goes to court then rightfully it would be considered to be incompetent or corrupt. This is the exact thing that the RTB are telling me and my tenant. If the RTB do not know the answer they should say so. Also all advice should be supplied online rather than by way of phone. With me the RTB said they gave my tenant the wrong advice because he gave them the wrong history on the phone. If all advice is given online and records can be retrieved them it can be ascertained if my tenant was lying or the RTB

Seems prudent to record the call to the RTB.

jeffwebb36

Dav010 wrote: »

Seems prudent to record the call to the RTB.

Not a bad idea. I will tell you a story when I worked as a tv engineer a indian/pakistan man who owned several shops gave me a contract to repair 4 vcrs the bill was 120 gbp but he did not want to pay 120 gbp so I said he could have a discount of 20 gbo if he signed a paper saying he would accept 1 month guarantee instead of the normal 3 months and he said yes. After a few months he
phoned me to say one of the recording was broken, and I told him that it was not in guarantee and advised him to read his reciept which stated no normal guarantee because the customer did not want to pay the normal price. Anyway he started calling me rude names and threatening to kill me. This happens to SE tv engineers quite often so I was not too frightened. However I did talk to a man who rented a shop from my customer and he told me my customer had criminal connections he call upon to do favors and the shop renter said he doubted if I would be killed but I might be hurt a little bit
I reported this to the police and they said they could not do anything because the threats were not recorded. Hence I borrowed a two way phone recorder and recorded the calls threatening to kill me, and took it to the police. They said I should not be doing the job if i was frightened and I should not bother them as they had more important crimes to deal with. A few months later officers from the same station called at my mothers house and threatened to arrest her because she would not give back a football which had been kicked against her front door window..... However the dad of the boy who kicked the ball was a mason

davindub

jeffwebb36 wrote: »

I never said the RTB should make a decision I said they advertise that they give advice, and giving known to be false advice is corrupt, if they do not know the answer they should say so. If a LL believes/trusts the advice given to him by the RTB and acts accordingly and decides to go for mediation then when the mediation happens he discovers the RTB gave the other side different advice he would not be happy. Also believing a dishonest or incompetent RTB agent could cost (by way of delaying eviction due to bad RTB advice) thousands in the way of lost rent.
Let us look at an example of similar scenario an accident helpline tells one of the parties involved in an accident he would win if the matter goes to court, and then tells the opposing person he would win if the matter goes to court then rightfully it would be considered to be incompetent or corrupt. This is the exact thing that the RTB are telling me and my tenant. If the RTB do not know the answer they should say so. Also all advice should be supplied online rather than by way of phone. With me the RTB said they gave my tenant the wrong advice because he gave them the wrong history on the phone. If all advice is given online and records can be retrieved them it can be ascertained if my tenant was lying or the RTB

They don't advertise that they give advice, they are the equivalent of the courts for landlords and tenants.

Your example is equally wrong, there is no accident helpline. If you need legal advice you engage a solicitor.

Even if the person who answers the phone gives you 100% assurances that you are correct it would be meaningless.

jeffwebb36

davindub wrote: »

They don't advertise that they give advice, they are the equivalent of the courts for landlords and tenants.

Your example is equally wrong, there is no accident helpline. If you need legal advice you engage a solicitor.

Even if the person who answers the phone gives you 100% assurances that you are correct it would be meaningless.

you must be a lawyer because you not objective and prejudice and not honest

jeffwebb36

davindub wrote: »

They don't advertise that they give advice, they are the equivalent of the courts for landlords and tenants.

Your example is equally wrong, there is no accident helpline. If you need legal advice you engage a solicitor.

Even if the person who answers the phone gives you 100% assurances that you are correct it would be meaningless.

i suspect you are a lawyer your are incapable of honest objective thought

dennyk

The RTB could be mistaken, or you and the tenant might be giving them different information regarding the situation (you don't know what the tenant actually said to them). If it goes to mediation, both sides would present their arguments and in a matter like this there should be a firm decision for one side or the other. What are the actual facts of the situation?

If you believe you have the right information and are interpreting the new laws correctly, then you should proceed with giving your notice accordingly and let the tenant take it up with the RTB via an official dispute if they disagree. The RTB isn't going to provide a legally binding determination unless someone officially brings a dispute, so it really doesn't matter what they might say in terms of unofficial advice beforehand, and the tenant is free to dispute your notice regardless of whether the RTB has advised them that it's wrong or not, so it really doesn't change anything. If the tenant wants to draw out the process, they can and will do so no matter who's actually in the right.

the_syco

jeffwebb36 wrote: »

you must be a lawyer because you not objective and prejudice and not honest

jeffwebb36 wrote: »

i suspect you are a lawyer your are incapable of honest objective thought

WUT?

=-=

Both may be correct from a different view. Do you leave out any information when talking to the PTRB that may hurt your cause?