There has to be some kind of recourse here, given that the company asked him to act as a guarantor KNOWING FULL WELL that there are already arrears on the account (which I assume from the bill landing 24 hours later).
There were undisclosed arrears at the time of the guarantee. If there's pre-existing default, the document has been executed in bad faith and he can apply for it to be set aside
Surely the guarantor is only liable from the date of the guarantee and not for prior debt…. And wouldn’t the landlord have to show they had informed him of the debt at the time of taking it out?
Taking a guarantee for a debt that is already in default without the guarantor knowing doesn't sound right... That should invalidate the contract. They have failed to disclose material information.
@@thomasdalton1508 Errr... Yes... it really is. Not sure where we go from here? There is a video of this same radio solicitor mentioning this also. Good luck with your ignorance
@@pottr147 No, it isn't. Check out the Sale of Goods Act, the Misrepresentation Act, the Housing Acts. There are all sorts of legal protections. Caveat Emptor is not remotely how the law works.
Being a guarantor for a family member has resulted in broken homes - So never EVER do this for a friend or extension. If my best friend of nearly 40 years asked me, I wouldn't stand as a guarantor for him.
It is very hard for a student to find accommodation without a guarantor since they have no credit record, limited savings, and limited income. However, I'd never be a guarantor for anyone other than my kids.
I made the mistake of lending a sum of money to a friend. In the end, I took this person to the small claims court. I used a lot of advice from Redwood Legal, now Court Wingman. And because of the value of the claim, used the firms small claims service. I wouldn't stand as a guarantor for anyone because you have to accept the terms and conditions of the original contract which you might not see. This guy did a nice thing but so did I and I got a lot of aggravation for it.
What makes Rupert's action more foolish than generous is how he is unable to afford this. If he'd had a few bob then maybe take the chance on being kind but not when you earn £25k.
If the caller has been charged for, say 12 months rental on an empty property and the landlord has made no effort to re-let it then if the agreement says reasonable efforts must be made to re-let this could be a way to get some of the monies back, of course they can't re-let if the tenant is still there. I was asked to be a guarantor, I counter proposed the landlord taking out an insurance policy and increases the rental charge to cover this. The landlord agreed and I was off the hook - something for others to investigate in this situation.
Surely witheld information negates a contract. Can't consent to something you haven't been told about, basically dishonest. Surprised that wasn't explored more.
I can’t follow how the guy is liable for arrears PRIOR to signing as guarantor. The title says they were after him in effect the next day for money. Surely they should have made that clear before he signed. Also, I thought guarantor agreements require a trail that the guarantor had independent advice. Often insisting it’s a solicitor and not someone who works within a solicitors office.
By guaranteeing a debt, you are essentially committing to gifting the borrower that money should they need it. You should only provide the guarantee if you are willing to make that gift. Plenty of people are willing to gift their child money if needed. Fewer are willing to gift their child's friend large somes of money.
Surely, SURELY, this cannot be the full answer. How in the HELL has the company decided the debt is to be paid within a day?! From the point of being informed, decisively, that the original tenant would not be making the payment, to being billed! It feels like there was debt assigned to the account that the guarantor was NOT aware of. I also find the additional rent for the next term scam-worthy. Is it not reasonable to assume the estate agent will fill their property and find someone else? Why isnt the estate agent billing for their losses, rather than some sort of unreasonable expectation predictor? Isnt the estate agent going to just make money off this, when, assuredly, they find someone else AND gouge this guy for everything he owns?
It’s a shame that a few more minutes aren’t given to each individual query especially ones that Joe Public can fall foul of if they don’t fully understand the implications. The guy has agreed to be a guarantor but if there was or could potentially be a cock up in the documents or the way it has all been set up his best course of action would be to have a free consultation with a solicitor for half an hour. Adding additional costs etc is worth checking out to see if that is acceptable considering the amount involved.
This is why you shouldn't guarantee someone's debt. You're basically saying "Yes, if this person can't pay it then i will pay it". Well guess what, this person can't pay and now you have to. A horrible lesson to have to learn but that's also common sense. As far as contracts go, this situation seems a bit dodgy. A guarantee is supposed to be "we'll risk crediting this person and if they can't pay, you will". It's risk mitigation. It's not supposed to be used to retroactively pile on debts to somebody within 24 hours of it. They're not asking him to guarantee any future debts, they're saddling him with current ones.
I understand the sons friend had mental health problems but he was going to uni, surely he was able to string a sentence together too let the poor guy know what hes getting himself into before asking for a guarantoor.
Like some of the other comments I would really question the validity of the guarantee. Firstly, did Rupert execute the guarantee as a deed (i.e. in presence of a - a witness)? If not then there's an argument the guarantee is unenforceable due to the lack of consideration Rupert would have received. Secondly, if Rupert was pressured for a debt 24 hours after signing the guarantee then it suggests that the debt was already accrued and owing at the time he was approached to provide the guarantee. This part is opinion (I don't know how watertight a legal argument this is) - If that was not disclosed to him then he MAY be able to argue that the creditor has acted fraudulently in not discussing that to him (of course the counter to this is that the principal debtor should have told Rupert) - so this is a bit flimsy. The lack of execution as a deed would be a stronger argument though. Definitely worth a solicitor taking a look at the guarantee itself. Edit - there is an equitable defence to a guaranteed debt that if the guarantor could not have reasonably foreseen the debt as being captured by the guarantee at the time the guarantee was executed, then the guarantor may not be liable for that portion of the debt (this is why banks take guarantee confirmations when borrowers upsize their credit facilities which are guaranteed). Rupert could therefore try to run this argument too (although again, not watertight).
I wonder if there’s a way for him to pull out of being a guarantor and go okay I owe the money to this point anymore from now on I am not liable for any more as I will no longer be the guarantor .
This is why I would NEVER be a guarantor for anyone, no matter what. There really is nothing in it for the guarantor. Just a huge ball-ache if/when things go wrong.
![Tenant discovers property is under threat of demolition: what can he do? [LBC Legal Hour]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/e2JIYfrEU1A/mqdefault.jpg)
![Tenant discovers property is under threat of demolition: what can he do? [LBC Legal Hour]](/img/tr.png)
![Am I off the hook if I have a guarantor for my loan? [LBC Legal Hour]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hC8u0QiXesk/mqdefault.jpg)
There has to be some kind of recourse here, given that the company asked him to act as a guarantor KNOWING FULL WELL that there are already arrears on the account (which I assume from the bill landing 24 hours later).
yeah I would have liked Daniel to spend a bit of time on this legal point.
It was up to the chump not to sign something without checking out what he was signing. What a total mug!
Clearly didn't look at what he was signing. A fool and his money...
Exactly. The whole thing is a con. His son's friend has stitched him up too.
How is posh boy Rupert only earning £25k pa.
Sounds like he was his partner
There were undisclosed arrears at the time of the guarantee. If there's pre-existing default, the document has been executed in bad faith and he can apply for it to be set aside
Surely the guarantor is only liable from the date of the guarantee and not for prior debt…. And wouldn’t the landlord have to show they had informed him of the debt at the time of taking it out?
Depends on the wording of the legal document, it might specifically state including or excluding historical balances
@ 🤔 definitely need to read the small print then!
That sounds scammy. They asked him to be guarantor AFTER a debt had built up. That surely cannot be right.
Taking a guarantee for a debt that is already in default without the guarantor knowing doesn't sound right... That should invalidate the contract. They have failed to disclose material information.
Caveat Emptor
@@pottr147 Fortunately, caveat emptor isn't the law in the UK.
@@thomasdalton1508 Errr... Yes... it really is.
Not sure where we go from here?
There is a video of this same radio solicitor mentioning this also.
Good luck with your ignorance
@@pottr147 No, it isn't. Check out the Sale of Goods Act, the Misrepresentation Act, the Housing Acts. There are all sorts of legal protections. Caveat Emptor is not remotely how the law works.
Clearly you know better than DB then.
Poor guy. 😢 Moral of the story here; if you sign a guarantee, be prepared to pay it! Nevertheless, can't help but feel sorry for the chap.
Sounds like dishonest trading to me
The student accommodation misled the guarantor into thinking there was no existing debt
To be guarantor of the friend of his son is a very generous act, most people wouldn’t do it!
Agreed, most people aren't that stupid.
Being a guarantor for a family member has resulted in broken homes - So never EVER do this for a friend or extension.
If my best friend of nearly 40 years asked me, I wouldn't stand as a guarantor for him.
What a genuinely lovely man.
He should have said NO as a guarantee for anybody
You'd have to be off your chump to stand guarantor for ANYBODY. Perfect way to end up in debt which is not of your making.
A lot of big student landlords will not have tenants without a guarantor.
It’s a den of thieves
A really stupid decision! No sympathy. Never, never guarantor for anyone.
It is very hard for a student to find accommodation without a guarantor since they have no credit record, limited savings, and limited income.
However, I'd never be a guarantor for anyone other than my kids.
@@tomsixsix If your children are going to university, new job etc, then they are ADULTS. If you bail them out you only make them weak.
So basically his sons friend has used them to get out of a prior debt? Mental health condition or not - that's totally indecent.
I made the mistake of lending a sum of money to a friend. In the end, I took this person to the small claims court. I used a lot of advice from Redwood Legal, now Court Wingman. And because of the value of the claim, used the firms small claims service.
I wouldn't stand as a guarantor for anyone because you have to accept the terms and conditions of the original contract which you might not see.
This guy did a nice thing but so did I and I got a lot of aggravation for it.
This is ridiculous. They shouldn't be able to not disclose a debt
What makes Rupert's action more foolish than generous is how he is unable to afford this. If he'd had a few bob then maybe take the chance on being kind but not when you earn £25k.
He did say son of my friend
You don't believe that do you? Clearly a 'partner'
He didn't, he said 'a friend of a son of mine.'
@scottwales9178 be realistic mate
What a disappointment! You try to lend a helping hand, and instead, you’re hit with a hefty bill. It's so disheartening! 😢
If the caller has been charged for, say 12 months rental on an empty property and the landlord has made no effort to re-let it then if the agreement says reasonable efforts must be made to re-let this could be a way to get some of the monies back, of course they can't re-let if the tenant is still there.
I was asked to be a guarantor, I counter proposed the landlord taking out an insurance policy and increases the rental charge to cover this. The landlord agreed and I was off the hook - something for others to investigate in this situation.
I can do things like this "yeaaaah no worries ill help you out", this is a reminder not to put myself in these situations
Surely witheld information negates a contract. Can't consent to something you haven't been told about, basically dishonest. Surprised that wasn't explored more.
I’d be very surprised if that guarantee in the context of which it was signed would withstand serious judicial scrutiny. Fight this tooth and nail.
I can’t follow how the guy is liable for arrears PRIOR to signing as guarantor. The title says they were after him in effect the next day for money. Surely they should have made that clear before he signed.
Also, I thought guarantor agreements require a trail that the guarantor had independent advice. Often insisting it’s a solicitor and not someone who works within a solicitors office.
How can you bill 1 day after for 2.5k ,they must be some kind of dosclosure
I feel he may have been liberal with the dates. Likely, this has been a few months.
DONT SIGN ANYTHING that you havent read fully. People are always out to get your assests. Don't make it easy.
Also take it to trial in this case. I don't know the law but as a potential juryer I would find in your favour.
Unfortunately this is what Guarantor means. I wouldn’t do it for anyone.
By guaranteeing a debt, you are essentially committing to gifting the borrower that money should they need it. You should only provide the guarantee if you are willing to make that gift. Plenty of people are willing to gift their child money if needed. Fewer are willing to gift their child's friend large somes of money.
" i feel terrible for you" but also wont do anything to help bahaha
Surely, SURELY, this cannot be the full answer. How in the HELL has the company decided the debt is to be paid within a day?! From the point of being informed, decisively, that the original tenant would not be making the payment, to being billed!
It feels like there was debt assigned to the account that the guarantor was NOT aware of. I also find the additional rent for the next term scam-worthy. Is it not reasonable to assume the estate agent will fill their property and find someone else? Why isnt the estate agent billing for their losses, rather than some sort of unreasonable expectation predictor? Isnt the estate agent going to just make money off this, when, assuredly, they find someone else AND gouge this guy for everything he owns?
Depends what is in the guarentee i suppose. Responsibility may lie on the orignal contract signer for misinforming the guarantor.
He needs to get himself to CAB posthaste
This sounds wrong he wasn't informed of the existing debt.
Top Tip: NEVER be guarantor for ANYONE.
It’s a shame that a few more minutes aren’t given to each individual query especially ones that Joe Public can fall foul of if they don’t fully understand the implications. The guy has agreed to be a guarantor but if there was or could potentially be a cock up in the documents or the way it has all been set up his best course of action would be to have a free consultation with a solicitor for half an hour. Adding additional costs etc is worth checking out to see if that is acceptable considering the amount involved.
Legal Beagles is a forum you can go to - ex solicitors, etc. give answers
something doesn't sound straight here
“Young man” aka sugar baby 😂
His son's friend.
Sounds like nonsense to me.
But also, very fightable if it's a pre-existing debt.
This is why you shouldn't guarantee someone's debt. You're basically saying "Yes, if this person can't pay it then i will pay it".
Well guess what, this person can't pay and now you have to. A horrible lesson to have to learn but that's also common sense.
As far as contracts go, this situation seems a bit dodgy. A guarantee is supposed to be "we'll risk crediting this person and if they can't pay, you will". It's risk mitigation. It's not supposed to be used to retroactively pile on debts to somebody within 24 hours of it. They're not asking him to guarantee any future debts, they're saddling him with current ones.
I understand the sons friend had mental health problems but he was going to uni, surely he was able to string a sentence together too let the poor guy know what hes getting himself into before asking for a guarantoor.
*typo in the title 🙈
Like some of the other comments I would really question the validity of the guarantee. Firstly, did Rupert execute the guarantee as a deed (i.e. in presence of a - a witness)? If not then there's an argument the guarantee is unenforceable due to the lack of consideration Rupert would have received. Secondly, if Rupert was pressured for a debt 24 hours after signing the guarantee then it suggests that the debt was already accrued and owing at the time he was approached to provide the guarantee. This part is opinion (I don't know how watertight a legal argument this is) - If that was not disclosed to him then he MAY be able to argue that the creditor has acted fraudulently in not discussing that to him (of course the counter to this is that the principal debtor should have told Rupert) - so this is a bit flimsy. The lack of execution as a deed would be a stronger argument though. Definitely worth a solicitor taking a look at the guarantee itself.
Edit - there is an equitable defence to a guaranteed debt that if the guarantor could not have reasonably foreseen the debt as being captured by the guarantee at the time the guarantee was executed, then the guarantor may not be liable for that portion of the debt (this is why banks take guarantee confirmations when borrowers upsize their credit facilities which are guaranteed). Rupert could therefore try to run this argument too (although again, not watertight).
I wonder if there’s a way for him to pull out of being a guarantor and go okay I owe the money to this point anymore from now on I am not liable for any more as I will no longer be the guarantor .
Er, no. How utterly ridiculous
This guy needs to get much better advice than has been given to on here. I’m frankly flabbergasted at the lack of good advice this guy gives out.
Lol not knowing esignature is a signature. So weird referring to this person as a 'young man' hahah, sugar daddy so what.
That's not what happened.
Sugar daddy, yeah that's what I thought
Clealry buggering the young man. Very very strange situation
This is why I would NEVER be a guarantor for anyone, no matter what. There really is nothing in it for the guarantor. Just a huge ball-ache if/when things go wrong.