Renting, wanting to stay, what could happen?

debrag

because the LL wants me to pay a new deposit and the 6 months is up on 23rd October 2009, if no deposit then they could get in a new tenant who will pay them one.

I am going to the CAB on Monday just to be sure.

Jowo_2

My understanding is that a break-clause is a trigger and that notice that it is being acted up is given. Have you actually received anything in writing from the landlord which indicates that the break-clause halfway through your yearly agreement is being activated or will be shortly?

I suspect that CAB will tell you to take your landlord to court in order to force them to protect your deposit in a tenancy deposit scheme.

debrag

I have received nothing only know they want a new deposit on 23rd October.

Jowo_2

debrag wrote: »

I have received nothing only know they want a new deposit on 23rd October.

They risk being ordered by the court to pay you x3 the sum of the deposit for failing to lodge it in a tenancy deposit scheme and once they understand the consequences of their failure, they'll rush to pay it inj.

Is that date the last day in which they can operate the break-clause, hence a way to lever pressure on you to cough up an unnecessary 2nd deposit?

debrag

yes 6 months after I moved in.

Wouldn't a LL who had to use their own money for a tenant deposit want that tenant out.

Jowo_2

debrag wrote: »

yes 6 months after I moved in.

Wouldn't a LL who had to use their own money for a tenant deposit want that tenant out.

Couldn't tell you but frankly, whether you stay or whether you go, he has to cough up the deposit if the LA has absconded with it now or at the end of your tenancy.

It's a shame that the landlord's anger for the incompetence of the agent is displaced and is now falling on the tenant. Hopefully, once he realises his obligation to replace the missing deposit, he'll take action against the appropriate party (the LA) and take them to the small claims court if they are still solvant rather than continuing with the rather daft notion that you have to lose the first one and pay another!

The landlord has been screwed over but his issues are with the LA, he just doesn't seem to realise this yet.

clutton_2

spot on jowo

tenants cannot be allowed to suffer loss because a LL used an incompetent letting agent

the LL must sue the LA for the deposit

there is no reason on earth why the tenant should pay a new deposit

As a LL - i would advise OP to stay put,pay the rent and do nothing - your LL cannot give you notice if your deposit has not been protected - as long as OP has a receipt for the deposit payment - then do nothing

bitsandpieces

If LA chosen by LL has lost the deposit, there's no obligation on you to pay another deposit (and LL should still protect and - when due - return your original deposit). If LA doesn't pay LL your deposit (or if they didn't pass on rent, for that matter) the LL needs to take action against LA - it's not your fault, or your problem.

debrag

So I should just tell them that the contract I've sign is valid and no new deposi is needed from me, they are to go after the LA for the deposit I've already paid etc

A periodic contract would come into affect May 2010/11 or after the 6 months is up.

gauly

If the LA doesn't return the deposit that is not your problem. The loss of the deposit must be paid for by the landlord if he can't get it back from the LA. Under no circumstances should you give the LL another deposit.

Also, as you pointed out earlier yourself: you cannot be evicted unless the deposit is registered in a deposit scheme. You can also sue the LL in the small claims court for a penalty of 3x your deposit unless he protects it.

I agree with your last post, your contract should still apply even if the LA is no longer around and it is the LL problem to get the deposit back.