Royal Mail could cost me £2000! Please help!

EagerLearner

Just wondering if there is an update from the OP and if DPS have indeed allowed extra time on this one, hope they get their cash back...

Hopejack

I agree entirely with N79's post.

Kevin, it is not acceptable that you do not know who has made the decision regarding your case. I think this should be reviewed as a matter of urgency. I think the Government should be informed of this about turn - surely their contract/tender mentioned transparency and fair dealings? I believe the other schemes DO publish their arbitrator's names - how do they manage?

N79 - I agree that one should in theory use the courts as opposed to the DPS (and I'm thinking that way myself) but there are two reasons why one would have to try and use the DPS a) the tenant cannot be traced (but then hopefully you would not have to go to arbitration anyway) and b) there is a school of thought that states that Judges do not like cases before them that have not gone through the arbitration route first, as that was what is was designed for. I've read this on a few forums now where LLs have attempted to take their T to court and been told as much by the Judge, it can start you off on the wrong footing before you get going.

N79

Hopejack wrote: »

I agree entirely with N79's post.

Kevin, it is not acceptable that you do not know who has made the decision regarding your case. I think this should be reviewed as a matter of urgency. I think the Government should be informed of this about turn - surely their contract/tender mentioned transparency and fair dealings? I believe the other schemes DO publish their arbitrator's names - how do they manage?

N79 - I agree that one should in theory use the courts as opposed to the DPS (and I'm thinking that way myself) but there are two reasons why one would have to try and use the DPS a) the tenant cannot be traced (but then hopefully you would not have to go to arbitration anyway) and b) there is a school of thought that states that Judges do not like cases before them that have not gone through the arbitration route first, as that was what is was designed for. I've read this on a few forums now where LLs have attempted to take their T to court and been told as much by the Judge, it can start you off on the wrong footing before you get going.

You can protect yourself against a by insisting on an alternative contact address at the start of the tenancy and putting a clause in the agreement that statest that the T must keep this address up to date. That way you have an address to serve on that a court will probably accept (they always have in my experience). If the T never gets the court papers because they failed to provide a forwarding address in order to avoid the dispute with you well that's just tough for the T. You get a judgement by default that you use to claim the deposit (or as much of it as you were disputing).

As for b, the DPS scheme rules require that if you use the DPS service then you have to abide by the decision. This fetters your legal rights, especially as the DPS lacks that other essential feature of a real justice system - a right of appeal. No English court will look down on you for refusing to use such a private "kangaroo style" court. Of course, a court would not be happy if you did not make some attempt at negotiation with the T first or refused to used a court appointed mediator. A normal LBA setting out the deductions you wish to make and asking for the Ts response should suffice.

I should make one thing clear. I strongly support deposit protection and the DPS and other companies are nearly as good as any other system for this (although I think the Belgian system is even better).

Hopejack

I totally agree with you in theory N79 however, there are cases out there where LLs have chosen to go to court rather than through the DPS. I can't say for definite that they have tried to negotiate with the T in other ways of course, but I can say that they Judge has mentioned that they should have used the DPS arbitration system. How much it can cloud their judgement on the case before them I don't know.

I'm fairly new to all this but it was my belief that you can still take a T to court if you are not happy with the DPS decision. Having said that, I'm not sure how much weight the Judge would give to the fact a decision has already been reached, whether it was arrived at fairly or not. In my case, the costs far outweigh the deposit, I'm happy to try arbitration if need be, I can of course still go to the court for the remainder should I so wish. Whether I chose to will depend on the DPS decision and the T is of course aware of this.

ETA - I think we've discussed the alternative address at the start of the tenancy before and reached the conclusion this is not that easy to achieve, especially if the let is long term. As you say, you could stipulate a condition in their Agreement but how much weight this would hold in court I'm not sure.

Dr.Shoe_2

My tip is to walk around the house with the landlord on the day you move out.

If the landlord is going to get arsey with your deposit then this will be the time for them to point out any problems that may or will affect the return of your deposit. What many landlords do is wait for the new tenant to pay a deposit before refunding yours.

clb776

I am a bit confused? I sorted mine all out online and transfered the money back to myself that way? Is this not always possible?

I find that ridiculous. According to their paperwork they cannot release any money until they have had consent from both parties, so how have they done this this time?

clutton_2

i am 99% convinced that a few months back i did a google search and found names, qualifications and CVs of arbiters for one of the deposit schemes,..... darned if i can find it just now... anyone else ?

wonder if these folks may have been the ones who have been sacked as one of the insurance schemes has now gone "in-house" with its arbitration processs and has sacked its professional arbiters.....

Kevin - you say that you have changed DPS policy in terms of including arbiters names on Decisons... when did this change take place please ?

Hopejack

Clutton - I can't find it either but I do recall reading that TDS do use their arbitrator's name and quals. It might be a case of contacting each scheme and asking them what they do as 'best practice', dumbing down or anonymous arbitration could surely never be classed as 'best practice' for either side involved in the dispute.

clutton_2

bump

""Kevin - you say that you have changed DPS policy in terms of including arbiters names on Decisons... when did this change take place please ?"

rafolio

Hi all, sorry in the delay in getting back to those who were interested but we received the decision back and it worked out extremely favourably on our part. We received back 90% of the total deposit.

Thanks again to everyone who advised, and particularly to Kevin Firth for arranging for me to be able to submit my evidence.