LLs Defying Legislation & Failing To Protect Tenant Deposits

tbs624

Clutton - come on, there’s some A1 wriggling out of Landlord responsibilities going on today: the law says that the LL is responsible for providing the info to the tenant.

Maybe LLs should just sit back, collect the rent and let the tenants do all the work relating to the property - gas & electrical safety, insurance, structural maintenance, etc?

The RLA (Residential LLs Association) says that the Certificates that the Scheme Administrators provide are not in themselves sufficient for the provision of the “prescribed information”

The LL has to give this prescribed info but it can be in any suitable form provided all the info is there - check out The Housing (Tenancy Deposits) (Prescribed Information) Order 2007 here:
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2007/uksi_20070797_en_1

and also look at
http://www.rla.org.uk/landlord/tenancy_deposits/tds-Documentation.shtml
for scheme-specifics.

As MSMonkey says, some of it could be within a separate document - some could be within a tenancy agreement. However, given that the Tenancy Agreement is signed before a deposit gets registered the necessary info is probably unlikely to be in there in full.

A valid S21 cannot be served whilst either the deposit remains unregistered or the “prescribed info” has not been provided by the LL.

Even if a tenant looks up the info his/herself the LL has still failed to meet his/her legal obligation.

As I’ve said elsewhere, ideally extending that provision to mean that absolutely no S21 may be served at all for any tenancy if the LL does not comply with the law by registering the deposit & giving the info out within 14 days of deposit receipt. So, it wouldn’t matter if it’s day 15 or day 95 when they do get round to it - no S21 full stop - watch a sudden knowledge of that law become apparent amongst all LLs.

Premier_2

moneysavinmonkey wrote: »

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" ?...

As with any other claim, application fee & court hearing fee.
About £140 for a claim for say £600
(allocation questionaire fee also applies to claims in excess of £1500)

lynzpower

As I’ve said elsewhere, extending that provision to mean that absolutely no S21 may be served at all for any tenancy if the LL does not comply with the law by registering the deposit & giving the info out within 14 days of deposit receipt. So, it wouldn’t matter if it’s day 15 or day 95 when they do get round to it - no S21 full stop - watch a sudden knowledge of that law become apparent amongst all LLs.

good heavens that really is very interesting....

carolt

Mmm, our landlord/agent took about 1 month to send ours on this year. But what if it is the fault of the system ie it's slow to send them to the landlord/agent in question? How does it work? Or is it immediate?

tbs624

Lynz - apologies - that paragraph of mine was missing the word "ideally", as in that's my view of a better way to get compliance, by extending the no S21 sanction. Have edited original so as not to unintentionally mislead anyone

The legislation clearly is not working well in practice - it would be interesting to read what anyone else would suggest to improve the legislative wording/possible sanctions for non-compliance.

tbs624

carolt wrote: »

Mmm, our landlord/agent took about 1 month to send ours on this year. But what if it is the fault of the system ie it's slow to send them to the landlord/agent in question? How does it work? Or is it immediate?

As an example, with mydeposits.co.uk (TDSL) there is no reason why a LL couldn't actually do it the same day- you register the deposit online and download a copy of the certificate there and then, together with an "Information for Tenants" leaflet. LLs can also register a deposit & pay the fee by phone. LLs can also take out the pre-requisite membership online or by phone.

SquatNow

tbs624 wrote: »

The legislation clearly is not working well in practice - it would be interesting to read what anyone else would suggest to improve the legislative wording/possible sanctions for non-compliance.

Just take the houses off them.

If the landlord doesn't follow the rules, they simple forfeit the ownership of the property. Automatically. Mandatory.

Not registering deposits, false damage claims, not carrying out repairs, S21 at move in, unauthorised access to rented property... these are all actions of a bad landlord which could faily be seen as justifying them being stripped of their rights over the property.

No landlord will ever have their property taken from them because they will all start following the rules. Rental problems will go away.

Mary_Hartnell

Am I being over cynical to think that one of the motivations in getting landlords to register deposits is to identify landlords?

I've noticed a lot of young women (well younger than me anyway) finding a new man in their life BUT wanting to rent out their existing property as a "bolt hole" should the need arise.

How does HMC&R (the tax man) identify these new people with an untaxed source of income?

tbs624

Mary - the title of this thread is LLs Defying Legislation & Failing To Protect Tenant Deposits

If you want to divert it to have a moan about LLs having to keep appropriate records on their rental income for HMRC, it's probably best to start a new thread using the heading that you ‘ve attached to your post ....;)

It doesn't matter *what* your reasons are for renting a property out, you have to declare to HMRC

sooz

paintpot wrote: »

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:

There is a rather large agency near me, which has quite a monopoly on our local area & a couple of branches. I don't use them, as I am more capable than them , but come into contact with a lot of people who use them.

Not only are they apparently clueless when it comes to the prescribed information, but worse, they seem totally unaware that the area in which they operate is subject to additional HMO licencing. With more & more large family house coming on the market to rent here, as the aren't selling, I dread to think how many of their clients, who are paying up to 17% for full management, are liable for £20,000 fines.