Tenant taking me to court - TDS - will I be ok?

theartfullodger

or maybe someone "confused"...

tbs624

00ec25 wrote: »

...Outcomes:
a) at end of fixed term period of AST if tenancy goes on to periodic basis the original deposit does NOT have to be protected as no NEW tenancy has been created..

It would be good to have a couple of test cases on this one because there is not total agreement amongst housing lawyers. The Housing Act 1988 S5 defines a periodic tenancy as one arising on the expiry of the original Fixed Term: some argue that the stat periodic is a continuation of the FT, but others hold the view that it is not a continuation because if the FT has expired, it is dead, it is no more (this parrot is deceased....)? So, potentially a series of "new" mini tenancies?

tbs624

Enfieldian wrote: »

Methinks this was a troll post anyway. Trying to stir up the reaction that he got......

Think you may be right , but we have to give 'em the benefit of the doubt don't we?

Enfieldian wrote: »

Good idea really, I hope my LL sees it too.......

FoxtonsRIP

ConfusedLandlord09 wrote: »

Hello,
I currently have a claim against me by a tenant who moved out in October of last year. I never protected the deposit but now realise that I probably should have. I have now protected the deposit for my new tanant. I returned the full deposit less some deductions that I thought were reasonable, 1 month after the termination of tenancy. The tenant wasnt happy with this and so lodged a claim for the 3x deposit fine. After I received this claim I then returned the remainder of the deposit, but admittedly this was 5 months after the tenant moved out. It's now going to court. I've returned the full deposit so I should be ok? The tenant hasnt had any financial loss out of this, so whats the big deal right?
Thanks to all.

It's ones like you that give Landlords a bad name. I hope they throw the book at you.

ConfusedLandlord09

Thanks to all for your comments. In my defence I rented my property out from the US, so wasnt in town to catch up with all tenancy law developments over the years.

I'm not sure what you mean about me giving landlords a bad name, I returned the deposit fully, and acted in good faith when I made the deductions I made, they were reasonable after all. And now I've had to return that money also, so the tenant has done better out of this.

I've done a fair bit of reading around this now and it looks like I'll be ok. The law states clearly that the judge has to order me to return the deposit or protect it before he can order the 3x fine. Clearly he cant do this as I have fully returned the deposit. So looks like I am in the clear. Looks all crystal clear dont you think? There can be no punishment for landlords if they return the deposit. The length of time after is irrelevant.

I'll let you know how I get on.

Catblue

ConfusedLandlord09 wrote: »

I'm not sure what you mean about me giving landlords a bad name, I returned the deposit fully, and acted in good faith when I made the deductions I made, they were reasonable after all. And now I've had to return that money also, so the tenant has done better out of this.

You made a unilateral decision to keep some of the deposit (which you say was "reasonable" and you acted "in good faith"). This was not agreed with the tenant.

So then why on earth did you later return that money? If the deductions were indeed reasonable, then there was no need to return this money.

And being an absent landlord is not a defence. If you can't be bothered to keep up with tenancy legislation then you can expect to find yourself in more hot water.

tbs624

ConfusedLandlord09 wrote: »

.... In my defence I rented my property out from the US, so wasnt in town to catch up with all tenancy law developments over the years. .

No defence. .... which century are you living in? "wasn't in town"? Were you hiding out in a remote corner of Appalachia or with the Amish or somewhere else that didn't have internet access, or post or news facilities?

Presumably you had a UK agent/UK address for service of notices relating to this tenancy as living in the US didn't prevent you from receiving the rent/deposit.......

alunharford

So you left the tenant with nowhere to serve legal papers and then promptly broke the law?

Blacksheep1979

ConfusedLandlord09 wrote: »

I'm not sure what you mean about me giving landlords a bad name, I returned the deposit fully

Yes - when threatened with legal action.

ConfusedLandlord09 wrote: »

and acted in good faith when I made the deductions I made, they were reasonable after all.

In who's point of view - the tenant obviously didn't think so...

ConfusedLandlord09 wrote: »

And now I've had to return that money also, so the tenant has done better out of this.

No, the tenant is in the position they should have been in with their whole deposit returned - but with added hassle.

barnaby-bear

ConfusedLandlord09 wrote: »

Thanks to all for your comments. In my defence I rented my property out from the US, so wasnt in town to catch up with all tenancy law developments over the years.

I'm not sure what you mean about me giving landlords a bad name, I returned the deposit fully, and acted in good faith when I made the deductions I made, they were reasonable after all. And now I've had to return that money also, so the tenant has done better out of this.

I've done a fair bit of reading around this now and it looks like I'll be ok. The law states clearly that the judge has to order me to return the deposit or protect it before he can order the 3x fine. Clearly he cant do this as I have fully returned the deposit. So looks like I am in the clear. Looks all crystal clear dont you think? There can be no punishment for landlords if they return the deposit. The length of time after is irrelevant.

I'll let you know how I get on.

So the tenant to get the deposit back had to spend 4 months chasing you via small claims... they'll have had costs - plus the whole point of the deposit scheme was so deduction disputes wouldn't reach court, overwhelming the court system. Who should foot the cost of the courts time, the tenants court costs etc.... you've wasted a lot of resources and people's time because you couldn't be bothered to do things properly. Legally no rent would have been payable to you if you hadn't given the tenants a UK address/agent for serving papers - and presumably someone is maintaining this property for you - so why didn't your agent notify of the legislation....