Broken door lock - maintenance issue but being deducted from deposit?

clutton_2

""so there is the chance that your deciding to go to court may make the landlord decide to give in."" but by the time the LL knew that they were being taken to court EL would have had to pay court costs .... and i would be really surprised if she wants to embark on yet another .long saga of getting a deposit back....

redcar_2

What I don't understand is if you both dispute the amount does it go the LL if you don't agree to use arbitration. Why doesn't he money go to tenant or stay in limbo unless the LL goes to court. This is the tenants money surely onus of proof is on LL to show they have a right to retain...

I must be missing something here?? Can someone help?

BitterAndTwisted

I believe that should the parties go to arbitration the monies do stay in Limbo. As you say, the monies belong to the tenants so the landlord should have to supply compelling evidence that any justifiable expenses should be released to them.

redcar_2

Thank you B&T.

What about if the parties don't agree and the possibility of going to court is on the table for both? Does the money not stay in limbo then until a court resoulution?

BitterAndTwisted

I'm no expert but if both parties agree to go to arbitration then they also agree to abide by the arbitrator's decision. If not, what would be the point?

clutton_2

if both parties agree a specific deduction then the DPS release the agreed two amounts to each party.

if both parties cannot agree a deduction, then if both parties agee to use arbitration then both sides submit evidence to the arbiters and accept that decision.

if one party, or both parties, refuses to use arbitration, then the money stays with DPS until a court order is obtained by either party and then DPS will allocate the funds as per the court order....

in recent weeks Kevin Firth has come here and said that if one party (as an example) say an absconding tenantm refuses to communication with the DPS then eventually DPS may well give the deposit funds to the Landlord... i assume that Vice VErsa also applies - if LL refuses to communicate then DPS may give deposit funds to tenant - eventually

"" a landlord should have to supply compelling evidence""

a LL does not have to supply compelling evidence but has to supply evidence that shows his case on the "balance of probabilities" - rather than 'reasonable doubt' which is how the court system operates....

BitterAndTwisted

Thank you Clutton! It appears that I shall have to go back to school and improve my English language comprehension. In any case, to me balance of probabilities would be pretty darned compelling indeed.;)

clutton_2

this "balance of probabilities" is very interesting, because as DPS so frequently say the money belongs to the tenant.. fair enough.. but it seems to me from having read many many reports of their adjudicators' decisions, that DPS work on the balance of probabilities that the tenant is telling the truth in their submitted evidence...

sadly as far as my experience goes, any tenant who cannot agree a fair deduction with me in person, and therefore either arbitration or court follows, then the balance of probabilities from MY perspective is that the tenant will lie through his/her teeth to get their money back even if they know they are in the wrong....

I dont think that DPS has any concept of this as they have no experience of being a LL....

Hopejack

Here here Clutton. I think you should become an adjudicator for DPS (only joking!).

The dealings I've had so far with the DPS and their 'balance of probablities' also makes me believe that they are skewed towards favouring the tenant. Yes it's the tenant's money but lets face it, if the LL is going to the hassle (and believe me it's a HUGE hassle and very stressful) of putting evidence together (think - jumping through hoops of fire), then I would say 9 out of 10 LLs by that point genuinely believe that money should be theirs - by that point many LLs are well out of pocket on repairs/making good a property that has been damaged/wrecked .

It is my understanding (and I'm on a steep learning curve) that if both parties refuse arbitration and do not go to court (i.e. only threaten a court process but do not carry it through) then the money stays with the deposit scheme/holder.

There has got to be a better way imo.

clutton_2

""Here here Clutton. I think you should become an adjudicator for DPS (only joking!). "

i applied to be on their landlords panel but heard nothing... i expect they get annoyed at my challenging them and are looking for less "contentious" individuals... me - i speak my mind.... i doubt they like that... especially when it seems that i know more L&T Law than some of their adjudicators..... (that doesn't take a lot - btw - i'm not blowing my own trumpet here, as i am wrong like the rest of the world now and again)