LL holding back £100 deposit for three months

jangor_2

Thankyou so much for this reply, it is really helpful. I agree it is possible my son has mislaid the paperwork but he is going to have a thorough search this evening and also contact the three schemes, as advised, to see if they have any record of his deposit being registered. He doesn't want to make a big fuss but just wanted to know if the LL was correct in retaining part of the deposit for three months.

Fire_Fox

Was the professional clean of a high standard? Why would the landlord expect fleas, were there pets? What was agreed about fumigating?

00ec25

PS

important question - the LL did NOT live in the flat, ie your son was a lodger? If your son was a lodger then the deposit would not have to registered in ascheme.
If son had sole use of the flat then the LL has not registered the depost and cannot legally retain 1 penny of the deposit or deduct 1 penny for any damages or costs of cleaning.
I appreciate you don't want to make a fuss but the only way you will get that £100 back is to point out he may have acted illegaly - you need to know if the dep was registered!

jangor_2

Thankyou for the responses. He was permitted to keep the dog from the start of the tenancy. The only stipulation was that he have the carpets professionally cleaned. My son used a reputable cleaning company, as the LL requested, and provided the LL with the receipt. He was the tenant of the flat and not a lodger. He is presently checking to discover if his deposit is in a scheme. It seemed strange to me also that having had the checkout carried out some four weeks ago the landlord has now mentioned retaining part of the deposit and this only after my son has been chasing her for over two weeks to discuss the deposit. I have two dogs of my own and am very conscious of fleas. My son's dog most definitely does not have fleas. I am also concerned that the flat has now been re-let.

jangor_2

Further information from my son has now come to light. Now he has read the contract fully (???) it does actually state that £100 will be retained for three months in case of infestation. However the flat has now been re-let and I am puzzled how he can be blamed if the new tenant also has a pet should any fleas appear. He has just received a text from the LL advising she has sent a cheque for £435 to him (not yet received) and has deducted £100 as per the Tenancy Agreement. This would seem to indicate to me that the deposit has not been placed in a deposit scheme. I am therefore unsure what his position is now. Unfortunately, due to his working hours, he has been unable to make direct contact with the schemes today but will try tomorrow.

jangor_2

I have finally managed to obtain the full story from one hopeless son!! He signed a TA agreement with the LA. The agreement actually states that £100 would be retained for three months in case fleas are found in the property after he vacated. However it also states that the LA will place his deposit (£435 plus £160 extra for the dog, totalling £585) into the Tenancy Deposit Scheme. It further states it is required that he has the carpets professionally cleaned. Two weeks after he signed the contract the LA contacted him to advise the LL had requested the LA to forward the deposit to her as she would be placing it in a scheme of her own choice. Apparently, at that stage, the deposit had not been placed in any scheme. On departure he had the checkout carried out with the inventory, which he has. He was advised everything was fine and it was just left that he have the carpets cleaned professionally. This he had carried out and provided the LL with the receipt. He then chased the LL for two weeks before she finally replied on Tuesday advising she would be sending him a cheque for £485 and retaining £100 as stated in the agreement. He has now checked with the three deposit schemes and his money has not been held with any of them. In the meanwhile the flat has been relet. He is therefore unsure what to do next. Should he just forget it knowing he will never see the £100 or should he take matters further. He is a fairly low wager earner. I have no idea what to advise him to do. Any further comments would be much appreciated.

00ec25

as a LL myself I am appalled. This LL needs to be taught a very sharp lesson. They have not protected the deposit knowing full well that they should do so.

Your son should send the LL (copied to the LA but NOT addressed to the LA) a "letter before action" requesting return of the full deposit as the LL has failed to protect the deposit and has not reurned it in full despite the checkout being completed satisfactorily, their tenancy agreement terms are irrelevant, as a court would regard these as unfair, which IMHO is excatly why the LL has failed to register the deposit as they breach the scheme rules anyway.

Failure to comply with this request will result in your son taking action through the small claims court (can be done online at tiny cost) for failure to lodge the deposit as legally required and is therefore seeking the automatic penalty which arises in this case of x3 the value of the deposit. The LL will thereofr have to pay your son approx £1,750 compensation.

Make sure you mean it in your letter, only deal with the LL in writing, do not engage in verbal communication, and if the LL has any sense they will return the £100 in exchange for you dropping it before you actually need to do any court actions.

further reading here:
http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/paying_for_a_home/tenancy_deposits/getting_an_unprotected_deposit_back

jangor_2

Thankyou so very much for your response. That is so helpful and I will ensure he follows your advice. Thankyou again.