We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Landlords Keeping Deposit
Comments
-
ladyofelysium wrote: »Okay, the landlord replied and she did not mention the deposit being protected at all, she spoke nothing of it. All she did was talk about damage to the property & include photos.
She said the front door was never reported to them in time for them to do anything & the back door also would not lock, which I have no knowledge about. She said the garden will cost £300 to repair & the carpet £200 to repair. She also mentioned a few scratches to the rear part of the back door, a small car wheel left in the garden (which I honestly thought my husband had removed, my bad) & a small hole in one of the indoor doors which I am unsure whether or not was there.
So now what do I do? I'm worried that if we did take her to a Small Claims Court over the deposit not being protected than her claims about the damage would go against us. Should I just drop the whole thing? I've got [proof the deposit was not protected, but now she's said allllll this damage 'we done' is going to cost a lot, should I just leave it?
Can the LL prove that all of the above problems were not there when you moved in and you are therefore responsible?If you've have not made a mistake, you've made nothing0 -
ladyofelysium wrote: »Okay, the landlord replied and she did not mention the deposit being protected at all, she spoke nothing of it. All she did was talk about damage to the property & include photos.
She said the front door was never reported to them in time for them to do anything & the back door also would not lock, which I have no knowledge about. She said the garden will cost £300 to repair & the carpet £200 to repair. She also mentioned a few scratches to the rear part of the back door, a small car wheel left in the garden (which I honestly thought my husband had removed, my bad) & a small hole in one of the indoor doors which I am unsure whether or not was there.
So now what do I do? I'm worried that if we did take her to a Small Claims Court over the deposit not being protected than her claims about the damage would go against us. Should I just drop the whole thing? I've got [proof the deposit was not protected, but now she's said allllll this damage 'we done' is going to cost a lot, should I just leave it?
No - she failed to do her bit by law and protect it.0 -
Can the LL prove that all of the above problems were not there when you moved in and you are therefore responsible?
I've got no idea. She sent photos of the garden 'before' we moved in (not date stamped though) & it looks quite lush, which is certainly wasn't when we moved in! I've got no proof that it wasn't like that though. I admit that the garden wasn't looking fantastic when we left, but all that needs doing is waiting for some patches of grass to grow in.
So, do I now send another letter re-iterating my complaint about the fact that the deposit wasn't protected? Or do I start a claim now I know that it wasn't from the emails I got from all 3 deposit protection schemes?0 -
BitterAndTwisted wrote: »You should mention in your letter that the deposit should have been registered with one of the three deposit-protection schemes by law and the courts have been known to have awarded three times the deposit as a penalty for not doing so. (Please note that this penalty is discretionary, not mandatory so it's not absolutely certain whether you would be awarded it should you need to go to court.)
Deposits cannot be protected once a tenancy has ended so your landlord will not be able to do this retrospectively.
Has this altered now? I know the law states the deposit must be protected by the landlord and the Prescribed Information given to the tenant by 14 days of receiving the deposit: if not the court must award 3 times the deposit. I know some landlords are getting out of this becuase of the poor wording of the law, so that once they are taken to court, they can just put the deposit in a scheme before they go to court.
As you say, the deposit can't be protected now because the tenancy has ended, so surely the court must follow the 'must award 3 times the deposit' wording?RENTING? Have you checked to see that your landlord has permission from their mortgage lender to rent the property? If not, you could be thrown out with very little notice.
Read the sticky on the House Buying, Renting & Selling board.0 -
MissMoneypenny wrote: »Has this altered now? I know the law states the deposit must be protected by the landlord and the Prescribed Information given to the tenant by 14 days of receiving the deposit: if not the court must award 3 times the deposit. I know some landlords are getting out of this becuase of the poor wording of the law, so that once they are taken to court, they can just put the deposit in a scheme before they go to court.
As you say, the deposit can't be protected now because the tenancy has ended, so surely the court must follow the 'must award 3 times the deposit' wording?
I've got no clue, but our tenancy has definitely ended.0 -
ladyofelysium wrote: »I've got no idea. She sent photos of the garden 'before' we moved in (not date stamped though) & it looks quite lush, which is certainly wasn't when we moved in! I've got no proof that it wasn't like that though. I admit that the garden wasn't looking fantastic when we left, but all that needs doing is waiting for some patches of grass to grow in.
So, do I now send another letter re-iterating my complaint about the fact that the deposit wasn't protected? Or do I start a claim now I know that it wasn't from the emails I got from all 3 deposit protection schemes?
Did you have a check-in inventory carried out when you moved in? If you did, was it signed by both parties?
Have you got a house contents policy with the added extra of Legal Cover? If you have, is the legal cover provided by one of the good firms like ARAG or DAS? A lot of the well known brokers tend to use legal cover from these firms.RENTING? Have you checked to see that your landlord has permission from their mortgage lender to rent the property? If not, you could be thrown out with very little notice.
Read the sticky on the House Buying, Renting & Selling board.0 -
MissMoneypenny wrote: »Has this altered now? I know the law states the deposit must be protected by the landlord and the Prescribed Information given to the tenant by 14 days of receiving the deposit: if not the court must award 3 times the deposit. I know some landlords are getting out of this becuase of the poor wording of the law, so that once they are taken to court, they can just put the deposit in a scheme before they go to court.
As you say, the deposit can't be protected now because the tenancy has ended, so surely the court must follow the 'must award 3 times the deposit' wording?
No - the LL in this case could repay the deposit in full to the T instead. Provided they do this before the court hearing then, based on the judgment in Universal vs Tensia that it is the status of the deposit on the day of the court hearing that matters, there would be no "unprotected" deposit against which the penalty can be awarded.
At least, that would be my argument in court! Of course, the T would have "won" in that they would have received their full deposit back.0 -
MissMoneypenny wrote: »Has this altered now? I know the law states the deposit must be protected by the landlord and the Prescribed Information given to the tenant by 14 days of receiving the deposit: if not the court must award 3 times the deposit. I know some landlords are getting out of this because of the poor wording of the law, so that once they are taken to court, they can just put the deposit in a scheme before they go to court.
As you say, the deposit can't be protected now because the tenancy has ended, so surely the court must follow the 'must award 3 times the deposit' wording?
As far as I recollect the wording of the original legislation was ambiguous in that there were qualifiers. Something like "must" and "and". This has been contested in the High Court and the ruling was that three-times the deposit as a penalty is not mandatory but discretionary.
OP: please answer the question about the check-on inventory and DO NOT be intimidated by your landlord's threats! Unless those photos of the garden were time-stamped I'd contest their validity in court if it came to it.
Wasn't there a problem with the door when you tried to enter the property when you took up the tenancy? This issue sounds completely like normal "wear and tear" to me and I think this is the stance you should take with the landlord. It sounds like they're trying to invent some new things just to be ruddy awkward. Do not fall for this.
Just write to them with the heading "Letter Before Action" telling them that you intend to start a claim in the Small Claims Court and that you shall be asking the court to award you three-times the deposit as penalty for not lodging it with one of the three approved schemes. Enter into no further discussion with them whatsoever.0 -
I suspect the LL knows that they could land themselves in trouble and are trying to bluff their way out....
0 -
MissMoneypenny wrote: »Did you have a check-in inventory carried out when you moved in? If you did, was it signed by both parties?
Have you got a house contents policy with the added extra of Legal Cover? If you have, is the legal cover provided by one of the good firms like ARAG or DAS? A lot of the well known brokers tend to use legal cover from these firms.
Yes I have a check-in inventory carried out, it was signed by both parties. All it says is either Good/Fair under X part of the property.
Our contents insurance is with an American holder, USAA. I highly doubt there is legal cover for within the UK.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards