LLs Defying Legislation & Failing To Protect Tenant Deposits

tbs624

A recent DPS survey claims to show that 62% of LLs are defying the deposit protection legislation.

See: [FONT=&quot]https://www.depositprotection.com/WebContent.axd?docid=!!97b27ff0-8ae8-473b-af6d-013a61e69e2a}[/FONT]

clutton_2

i met a LL yesterday who did not know about the tenancy deposit scheme - she has had the same tenant for the past 5 years who are just now moving out - she's going to be on a steep learning curve now methinks.

jacnorm

I know of LL that had no idea at all about the scheme. They are relatives of my LL and have had the same tenant for years who are now moving out. They thought I was mad when I mentioned it and they say they will not use this scheme. I have no complaints about my LL but, some really should learn before they enter into things.

paintpot

It's not just landlords though, agents can be equally as clueless. I used one only last month for the first time for let only and told them I would protect the deposit myself. Turns out that was a wise move, they had never heard of prescribed information and haven't provided it to any tenant. Mmm, I bet their client landlords are going to happy when they find out and have difficulty removing a tenant under a S21. :rolleyes:

franklee

Well it's not surprising to me after reading that ruling where the judge didn't award the 3xdeposit fine as the deposit had been protected but only just before the time it got to court. That just sends out the message to only bother protecting the deposit if the tenant takes court action which makes a mockery of the whole thing.

moneysavinmonkey

My agent is in general quite good + professsional, very clued up about gas safety certificates, giving notice/asking permission to do inspections, tenancy agreement carefully worded in light of OFT guidance etc.

They have protected my deposit but did not give me the prescribed information or a copy of the certificate provided by the scheme - I had to phone around and find out for myself where the deposit was protected.

So although they aren't in for a fine, if/when they come to issue me with a Section 21 notice they will get a shock.

Of the 38% of landlord who say they are *complying* with the legislation, how many are still getting it wrong!

Premier_2

franklee wrote: »

Well it's not surprising to me after reading that ruling where the judge didn't award the 3xdeposit fine as the deposit had been protected but only just before the time it got to court. That just sends out the message to only bother protecting the deposit if the tenant takes court action which makes a mockery of the whole thing.

You could say the same thing about any debt. Why bother paying it if the only way the creditor can enforce it is with a court order?

The reality is that should it be necessary to go to court to enforce the right, the defendant will suffer the costs of doing so, which in proportion to the original amount in dispute is often relatively large. This applies even if the matter is settled before any hearing.

In the case of a tenancy deposit, legislation also allows for where the deposit is not returned or protected by the date of the court hearing, then an extra penalty is also imposed on the wrongdoer by providing increased compensation to the claimant.

HouseBuyer_2

moneysavinmonkey wrote: »

They have protected my deposit but did not give me the prescribed information or a copy of the certificate provided by the scheme - I had to phone around and find out for myself where the deposit was protected.

So although they aren't in for a fine, if/when they come to issue me with a Section 21 notice they will get a shock.

what happens with a s21 notice if they don't provide you with a copy of the certificate provided by the scheme?

Our LA appears to be quite professional and is registered with one of the deposit protection agencies but we did not receive a copy of the certificate when we moved in a year ago.

clutton_2

when the schemes first came in one of them (not DPS) had a serious software problem for several months and it turned out that tenants were not being informed - they are now. there is nothing stopping you from registering on the scheme yourself to check your LLs and your registration

moneysavinmonkey

Premier wrote: »

The reality is that should it be necessary to go to court to enforce the right, the defendant will suffer the costs of doing so, which in proportion to the original amount in dispute is often relatively large. This applies even if the matter is settled before any hearing.

In the case of a landlord not protecting a deposit - until say the day before the court hearing - what "cost" do they suffer that is "relatively large to the amount in dispute" ?

Premier wrote: »

You could say the same thing about any debt. Why bother paying it if the only way the creditor can enforce it is with a court order?

Exactly, the law was (supposedly) introduced to mean that the deposit was not treated like any other debt so that tenants got their deposits back (when due) automatically/quickly. If the matter can still be treated as any other debt then the legislation is not working.

moneysavinmonkey

HouseBuyer wrote: »

what happens with a s21 notice if they don't provide you with a copy of the certificate provided by the scheme?

Our LA appears to be quite professional and is registered with one of the deposit protection agencies but we did not receive a copy of the certificate when we moved in a year ago.

Depends. They need to give you certain "prescribed information" they could have done this in separate paperwork or even within your tenancy agreement so the 'certificate' is not necessary. The certificate contains all the relevant information also though.

If you haven't been given the "prescribed information" a Section 21 notice can not be validly served, although once you have been given the information the LA/LL can then issue one.