Checking my bond

Insomniac666

tbs624 wrote: »

Whilst I don't condone LAs/LLs who fail to comply on tenancy deposit regs, you also need to bear in mind that once you overstay your Fixed Term expiry date, the tenancy becomes what is known as a Statutory Periodic agreement which runs from month to month (assuming rent paid monthly, ) with the LL having to give you 2 months notice and you needing to give one month, to tie in with the rental period.

I've managed to sort out with new accomodation that I can move out on correct time, so I dont' need the additional 3 days after all.

tbs624 wrote: »

Just as your LL can't have it both ways, neither can you. Either you argue that the upfront payment was rent, hence you are not paying your final month's rent or you argue that it it was in fact a deposit and therefore an S21 cannot be validly served.

Sorry I may have misread, earlier I thought if there was no deposit the S21 was invalid, not that it's invalid if my rent was a "deposit"

tbs624 wrote: »

You've already commented on the fact that you have had rent arrears at some point, so it sounds as though you haven't kept to your own obligations under the tenancy agreement. ( Although if you had paid extra "rent in advance" you perhaps were not actually in arrears)

I did owe them rent but this was cleared within 4 weeks, after I had informed them beforehand abotu my job.

tbs624 wrote: »

The fact that it was a "brand new build" means that its more likely they can provide sufficient evidence of the condition of the property. As a T you are obliged to return the property in the same condition as when let, save for "fair wear and tear". Note Rabbitmad's post earlier in the thread - its oft-repeated on here that no signed inventory =absolutely no claim for damage is possible, which is not the case.

I understand that no inventory doesn't give me free reign to go mad with a crayon over the walls. Had I just paid another months rent then waited for the non-protected deposit to come back, they prob wouldn't say anything, after speaking to them they were clearly annoyed i realised they hadn't protected the deposit.

tbs624

Insomniac666 wrote: »

ISorry I may have misread, earlier I thought if there was no deposit the S21 was invalid, not that it's invalid if my rent was a "deposit"
.

If the "advance rent" is held in fact to be a deposit and that deposit has not been scheme registered, nor the scheme's prescribed info passed to you as the T, then no S21 may be validly served until such time as the "deposit" has been registered

Housing Act 2004: s215 Sanctions for non-compliance

(1) If a tenancy deposit has been paid in connection with a shorthold tenancy, no section 21 notice may be given in relation to the tenancy at a time when—

(a) the deposit is not being held in accordance with an authorised scheme, or

(b) the initial requirements of such a scheme (see section 213(4)) have not been complied with in relation to the deposit.

(2) If section 213(6) is not complied with in relation to a deposit given in connection with a shorthold tenancy, no section 21 notice may be given in relation to the tenancy until such time as section 213(6)(a) is complied with.

(3) If any deposit given in connection with a shorthold tenancy could not be lawfully required as a result of section 213(7), no section 21 notice may be given in relation to the tenancy until such time as the property in question is returned to the person by whom it was given as a deposit.

(4) In subsection (3) “deposit” has the meaning given by section 213(8).

(5) In this section a “section 21 notice” means a notice under section 21(1)(b) or

(4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988 (recovery of possession on termination of shorthold tenancy).

Insomniac666

tbs624 wrote: »

If the "advance rent" is held in fact to be a deposit and that deposit has not been scheme registered, nor the scheme's prescribed info passed to you as the T, then no S21 may be validly served until such time as the "deposit" has been registered

Housing Act 2004: s215 Sanctions for non-compliance

(1) If a tenancy deposit has been paid in connection with a shorthold tenancy, no section 21 notice may be given in relation to the tenancy at a time when—

(a) the deposit is not being held in accordance with an authorised scheme, or

(b) the initial requirements of such a scheme (see section 213(4)) have not been complied with in relation to the deposit.

(2) If section 213(6) is not complied with in relation to a deposit given in connection with a shorthold tenancy, no section 21 notice may be given in relation to the tenancy until such time as section 213(6)(a) is complied with.

(3) If any deposit given in connection with a shorthold tenancy could not be lawfully required as a result of section 213(7), no section 21 notice may be given in relation to the tenancy until such time as the property in question is returned to the person by whom it was given as a deposit.

(4) In subsection (3) “deposit” has the meaning given by section 213(8).

(5) In this section a “section 21 notice” means a notice under section 21(1)(b) or

(4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988 (recovery of possession on termination of shorthold tenancy).

It's definately not been registered with any of the 3 schemes, and hand written on the tenancy agreement by the LA is - "2 months rent paid no deposit". I checked with the schemes last week.

The date of leave they gave with the section 21 notice was me to be out on the 13/03/10.

Insomniac666

Quick update.... move done, it ended up being one day over and they wanted to charge me ££ for the one day which I agreed too, house was cleaned top to bottom, I was told to leave keys with the neighbour as I had missed one of the representatives on a visit (I was in middle of the move so it looks like they didn't want to wait), nothing signed by either of us... just waiting to hear of them now for anything they want to bill me for.

Feel so much better being out of there... new LL wants me in there for minimum of a few years (longer the better his words), he's already had a new roof fitted in the 2 weeks since I said yes to the house, didn't take my deposit until 3 days after I moved in and let me move my stuff in a few days earlier for no cost...

I wish I'd gone private renting instead of a company that seemed to onlywant me there as a stop gap whilst selling me a story of a Long Term Let..

Now move over can concentrate on getting everything else sorted in my life.... so back to the Debt Free boards for me!

Insomniac666

Well so much for peace, finally heard off LL - they want £200 for cleaning the carpet after I left, thought they were having a laugh. Luckily I took photo's after washing carpets and cupboards just before handing in keys to neighbour.

They've gone to the court to request the money to be paid, I've written back to court to dispute this, and they've contacted my guarantor which I could have done without. Can they do this even though the LL is pursuing me for costs via the court? as it could have been that we both paid the costs? (if I agreed to them).

The LL is also claiming that they didn't know about my dogs or that we were told it would be a long term let.

(Also found out one of the LL's was next door watching me move out so why he couldn't have come over and aksed to view there and then... makes me think they planned to ask for cleaning money all along.)

If they want to try and be funny with me as i caught them out over the Bond, I may go down the route of claiming for them breaking the law on deposit protection and see how they feel with the threat of having to pay out 3x bond.