TDS dispute question ask..

moromir

lumscx wrote: »

moromir/Pepzofio,

The 10 day rule is actually written down in my AST contract and signed by both parties. If it is just a guideline rather than a rule... Does it mean that other terms in the AST are just guidelines? For instance, paying the rent is just a 'guideline'???

Its highly unlikely the TDS would throw out a Landlord's legitimate proposed deductions just because he missed the 10 day deadline, he would probably get a strong talking to by the TDS, they won't be impressed by his conduct.

With all due respect, your statement is too ridiculous to address but suffice to say, I'd leave it out of your reply to the TDS unless you want to be laughed out the door.

clutton_2

it seems to me from my own experience as a LL and reading several forums that none of the tenancy deposit schemes have enough staff to be able to stick to their own guidelines, time-frame wise, so how they can moan at landlords who are late is a bit hypocritical... if indeed they do this...

""For instance, paying the rent is just a 'guideline'???" - dont be so silly...

lumscx

It sounds to me that there is a loophole in the TDS system that the LL could always hold the deposit for a few more months by not telling the tenancy what the dispute amount is.

In such case I don't see the benifit of using TDS... probably straight to the small courts claim is the way to go...

moromir

If the proposed deductions have no merit, then dispute it via TDS or small claims.. it hardly matters which?

Its starting to sound like you know the deductions are justified and were hoping to get out of it on a technicality.

tbs624

I am assuming that you left the property in the same condition as when let, save for fair wear and tear and that you have a signed inventory?

moromir wrote: »

To paraphrase Pirates of the Caribbean, they're more like guidelines than an actual code.

They form part of the Scheme's *Membership Rules* ( in addition to being in the OPs tenancy agreement) but moromir is right that in some cases they get treated more as a guideline than as an instruction, with which the LL must comply. These are the sorts of issues around the tenancy deposit regs that Ts ought to be raising with their MPs and with the Housing Minister. The sloppiness with timings can cause some Ts a huge problem when they are having to pay out their next set of referencing fees, advance rent and tenancy deposit etc whilst their former LL takes his time repaying what is due.

moromir wrote: »

You don't get to refuse a deduction, you get to dispute a proposed deduction.

The TDS won't look kindly on the fact that your LL took so long to respond, but if they decide his proposed deductions are in fact legitimate, they won't throw his case out just because he was late submitting it.

I agree with moromir on this part. You also have the option of using the small claims court as an alternative, and a good paper trail is important.

OP - write to the LL and the LA . Copyit to the local private sector team at the council, to the deposit scheme and keep a copy for yourself. Stick only to the facts, and keep it polite.

eg "I spoke to you on x(date, and t the LA on x (date) It was suggested/ agreed that x or y. "

Cut and paste the relevant para from the scheme's membership rules ( in docs and forms section of their website) and quote from your tenancy agreement.Tell him that if he does not repay your deposit in full or present you with a written statement of proposed deductions by x date you will begin formal action for recovery. I'd go for 5 working days.

lumscx

The deduction is certainly unjustified. There is no signed check-in and check-out inventory however I do keep my own photographic evidence to cover my back.

The point is that from what the people experience here TDS doesn't not actually provide a speedily resolution and rather than waiting for months after months.
it may just better off to use small claim in one go.

moromir wrote: »

If the proposed deductions have no merit, then dispute it via TDS or small claims.. it hardly matters which?

Its starting to sound like you know the deductions are justified and were hoping to get out of it on a technicality.

Pepzofio

I'm pretty sure it's not even a technicality, even if it is a term of the tenancy agreement.

If you think about it, paying your rent on time each month is a term of the tenancy agreement, but being a couple of weeks late on a rent payment would not in and of itself be mandatory grounds for possession. (I doubt very much a judge would give possession on discretionary grounds either.)

By the same token, I'm pretty sure my TA just stated that LL would/should notify me of any deductions within 10 working days - I don't think it said that anything after this date was non-recoverable.

Depending on the scheme, you may not have the option to go to court - I'm fairly certain mine didn't offer this choice.

lumscx

Pepzofio wrote: »

I'm pretty sure it's not even a technicality, even if it is a term of the tenancy agreement.

If you think about it, paying your rent on time each month is a term of the tenancy agreement, but being a couple of weeks late on a rent payment would not in and of itself be mandatory grounds for possession. (I doubt very much a judge would give possession on discretionary grounds either.)

By the same token, I'm pretty sure my TA just stated that LL would/should notify me of any deductions within 10 working days - I don't think it said that anything after this date was non-recoverable.

Depending on the scheme, you may not have the option to go to court - I'm fairly certain mine didn't offer this choice.

MY AST stated the term MUST..

Those are just independent scheme, your option to go to court is always available.

Pepzofio

lumscx wrote: »

MY AST stated the term MUST..

Those are just independent scheme, your option to go to court is always available.

It probably says that you MUST pay the rent on time too though...

I may be wrong, but I'm fairly sure I heard that Judges will not look too kindly on you if you haven't at least tried to resolve it without going to court. It also costs you money to go to court, and depending on the area could take just as long in any case. IANAL, but I *think* that if you lose you can end up saddled with LL's costs as well, especially if Judge decides you've brought a frivolous case to court.

BitterAndTwisted

lumscx wrote: »

The deduction is certainly unjustified. There is no signed check-in and check-out inventory however I do keep my own photographic evidence to cover my back.

I think you are anticipating problems where there aren't any yet. Your landlord is going to have a very difficult time proving any damage to the property was caused during your tenancy with no check-in or check-out inventories.

Instead of thinking about circumventing the deposit-protection process I think you should sit tight and wait. I suspect your landlord's delay has been caused by their realisation about the lack of inventories.