Landlord has got away with my deposit - nothing the courts can do...

troubledtenant

Hi all,

I have just come from the court today where the judge adjourned my case for 28days. I left my rented property 18months ago, and the landlord never gave any of my deposit back.

My tenancy ended in August 2008, and my Landlord left without any correspondence with my deposit. The Property was returned in the same condition and I can see no reason for the Landlord to claim any of my deposit, and he did not put anything in writing anyway. My case is strong to retrieve my deposit but there is one problem.

On the lease, the Land Lord is titled as a Company Name - which is dormant. The Landlord which I dealt with over the whole year was an individual. I paid the individual rent into his personal account, the deposit was paid to an agent and then transferred by the agent into the individuals personal account, The address for the landlord is the individuals home address, The lease was signed by the individual, The dormant company is solely directed by the individual, and the accounts are signed by him, the property is wholly owned be the individual.

The landlord also never secured the deposit with the Tenancy Deposit scheme, although it stated in the lease that it was.

Since moving to a new property without this money and having to front up another deposit, I have been spiralling into debt. I am in the process of a small claims suit against the individual, but am aware that the judge could dismiss this on the grounds that the lease is with the dormant company.

Is there any way to prove that the individual is the Landlord and that I can make the courts force judgment against the individual?

Please if can you offer me any advice it would be very much appreciated.

Thank you for taking the time to read this.

FYI - the company name is BMG Properties.

Fire_Fox

Who owns the property, the company or the individual? Who have you attempted to take to the small claims court the company or the individual? Do you have an address at which to serve notices on the company? Is there a mortgage or other charge on the property?

Owain_Moneysaver

I am not a lawyer. It sounds as though you would have a good case for claiming that the individual was the recipient of the deposit and the individual is liable to return it. However I don't know whether, if you get a judgement against the company the court can then grant enforcement against the individual, or whether you would need to start a new action against the individual. There are fairly technical areas of company law involved in establishing personal liability of a director.

I would suggest naming both the individual and the company on the claim, let 'them' argue over which is liable, because one of them is.

troubledtenant

Fire_Fox wrote: »

Who owns the property, the company or the individual? Who have you attempted to take to the small claims court the company or the individual? Do you have an address at which to serve notices on the company? Is there a mortgage or other charge on the property?

The property is owned by the individual. I have issued the case against the individual - not the company. The company is registered to an address which i have, but the landlord (company) address in the lease is the individuals home address.

I know that the property was purchased by the individual with a mortgage in 2005, so yes i would expect the mortgage to still be on the property. I am unaware of any other charges.

Thanks

troubledtenant

Owain_Moneysaver wrote: »

I am not a lawyer. It sounds as though you would have a good case for claiming that the individual was the recipient of the deposit and the individual is liable to return it. However I don't know whether, if you get a judgement against the company the court can then grant enforcement against the individual, or whether you would need to start a new action against the individual. There are fairly technical areas of company law involved in establishing personal liability of a director.

I would suggest naming both the individual and the company on the claim, let 'them' argue over which is liable, because one of them is.

Yeah, the problem with this avenue is that the company would take the hit first, and has a value of £1 and no assets. hence why i need to bypass the company to the director.

Fire_Fox

What has the company got to do with the price of rice here? The property is owned by the individual, you have paid your deposit to the individual and you have taken the individual to court. Sometimes companies (e.g. letting agents) sign ASTs and sometimes the deposit is paid to them. This does not affect the landlord's legal responsibilities to the tenant, including securing the deposit in one of the three schemes and returning the deposit at the end of the tenancy.

I don't understand why the case was adjourned? You need to get a judgement against the landlord (as registered owner of the property NOT as director of the company), if he does not pay you may be able to get a charge on his property or the amount added to his mortgage. You would need to look into that part, as I am not sure whether that is possible for all types of debt.

clutton_2

FF - what is the minimum debt you can apply for a charge on property owned by the person owing the money ?

SouthCoast

Information on Charging Orders:

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/infoabout/enforcement/charging/index.htm

Fire_Fox

clutton wrote: »

FF - what is the minimum debt you can apply for a charge on property owned by the person owing the money ?

Haven't the foggiest! Hence the words may and I'm not sure to cover my ample rear. :rotfl:

BitterAndTwisted

Once you have a judgement in court against this shyster (and it seems fairly cut and dried), look into getting an attachment of earnings.

Or of course, now you know where he lives, you could always pop round and slash his tyres and take something sharp to the fancy paint-job on his motor, innit

troubledtenant

Fire_Fox wrote: »

What has the company got to do with the price of rice here? The property is owned by the individual, you have paid your deposit to the individual and you have taken the individual to court.

Basically the Landlord is stated on the lease as the company name and the judge reckons that he could only pass judgment against the company - getting no one anywhere.

FF - your clearly in my mindset - i just need a concrete way to get past the company vale.