LHA has expressed frustration because no one is taking any notice of his sticky on ground rent. My sticky on rights of entry has had over 80,000 hits. I strongly suspect that a significant majority of those who have read what I have to say have dismissed it. They will have done so not because they fail to be persuaded by my reasoning (which I readily admit may be faulty and shot down by some future decision of the Court of Appeal) but because they have read so often that a tenant has an absolute right to refuse entry to his landlord.
The internet is a fantastic resource. Public libraries have always been a fantastic resource, but one that few ever resorted to. The difference is that the internet comes into your home and with a search you can home in very quickly on what you want to know or a forum which purports to tell you what you want to know. The other difference though is that, at least on legal matters, books are more likely to be reliable than internet forums. Barrack room lawyers do not get to publish books on legal matters. As much misinformation is disseminated as information and the person looking for advice cannot distinguish between the two.
Until the case of Reichman v Beveridge the consensus of opinion in the saloon bars was that a landlord had a duty to mitigate his losses. The barrack room lawyers' house of cards was well and truly blown over in the matter of Bank charges.
It is difficult for someone looking to know where he stands who to believe. Unfortunately, he is more likely to believe whoever says what he wants to hear.
The internet is a fantastic resource. Public libraries have always been a fantastic resource, but one that few ever resorted to. The difference is that the internet comes into your home and with a search you can home in very quickly on what you want to know or a forum which purports to tell you what you want to know. The other difference though is that, at least on legal matters, books are more likely to be reliable than internet forums. Barrack room lawyers do not get to publish books on legal matters. As much misinformation is disseminated as information and the person looking for advice cannot distinguish between the two.
Until the case of Reichman v Beveridge the consensus of opinion in the saloon bars was that a landlord had a duty to mitigate his losses. The barrack room lawyers' house of cards was well and truly blown over in the matter of Bank charges.
It is difficult for someone looking to know where he stands who to believe. Unfortunately, he is more likely to believe whoever says what he wants to hear.