tenant stopped DD

HugoSP

The problem with charging tenants more than one months rent as a deposit is I believe that it may entitle the tenant to sublet the property. I don't know why but IIRC increasing the deposit above the equivilent of one month's rent can be seen by courts as allowing tenants to do this.

prudryden

HugoSP wrote:

The problem with charging tenants more than one months rent as a deposit is I believe that it may entitle the tenant to sublet the property. I don't know why but IIRC increasing the deposit above the equivilent of one month's rent can be seen by courts as allowing tenants to do this.

Tenants have always been able to sublet with the written permission of the landlord and that the new tenants are suitable and have adequate references. Six week deposit is now becoming the norm. I have always asked for six weeks and have yet had no objections over many years.

prudryden

abaxas wrote:

Not paying the last months rent is usually the best thing to do providing you can guarentee not to have any deductions.

It protects the tenant from dodgy landlords (sadly still in the majority) and the even more dodgy letting agents. That is not to say there are not good ones about.

There is little risk. If the LL goes to reclaim the last months rent, counter sue for the deposit. It's basically a zero sum game, with the tenant holding the trump card.

While I can appreciate your concern over dodgy landlords and dodgy tenants - most tenancies are a give and take with very good relationships between the two. Once a tenant decides to leave and breaks the conditions of the contract - you can expect the good relationship to start breaking down. An inventory and condition report is done, in my case, by an independent professional inventory company which is agreed and signed by the tenants and the landlord. This report is about 20 pages long. At the conclusion of the tenancy, the tenants then instruct another third professional party, if they want, to inspect the flat in accordance with the original condition report. There is very little room for error on either side.
This means that it is not a zero sum "game" for the tenant as you seem to indicate. His risk is that he will still have to pay for the last months rent and any damage which is rightfully due. Failure to do this may mean future bad references, bad credit report, and, at worse, a CCJ. Going to county court is easy for both sides. So it is a lot better to get along - landlords and tenants provide a service to each other.
It is better to follow the rules and be there for the initial inventory (paid for by the landlord) and the tenant to have a professional company inventory at the close of the contract (paid for by the tenant)

real1314

HugoSP wrote:

The problem with charging tenants more than one months rent as a deposit is I believe that it may entitle the tenant to sublet the property. I don't know why but IIRC increasing the deposit above the equivilent of one month's rent can be seen by courts as allowing tenants to do this.

If you charge more than 2 months rent as deposit it gives an automatic right to sub-let unless the tenancy agreement states that this is not allowed. i.e the tenant does not need the LL's permission if there's no exlcustion in the agreement
Anything less than 2 months rent means no sub-letting whether mentioned in the agreement or not. i.e subletting can only be done with the LL's full permission.


para 3.7 and 8.3 refer here:

http://www.communities.gov.uk/pub/919/AssuredandassuredshortholdtenanciesAguidefortenants_id1151919.pdf

Clive67

real1314 wrote:

If you charge more than 2 months rent as deposit it gives an automatic right to sub-let unless the tenancy agreement states that this is not allowed. i.e the tenant does not need the LL's permission if there's no exlcustion in the agreement
Anything less than 2 months rent means no sub-letting whether mentioned in the agreement or not. i.e subletting can only be done with the LL's full permission.


para 3.7 and 8.3 refer here:

http://www.communities.gov.uk/pub/919/AssuredandassuredshortholdtenanciesAguidefortenants_id1151919.pdf

That's really interesting about the sub-letting, never heard that before. I think I'm right in saying though that most standard agreements have a term in them to so no sub letting. But thanks fior the info.

real1314

I had "thought" it could alter the basis of the tenancy from shorthold to just assured, but couldn't find anything to support this "thought". I'd still avoid going over 2 months just to be on the safe side.

real1314

I had "thought" it could alter the basis of the tenancy from shorthold to just assured, but couldn't find anything to support this "thought". I'd still avoid going over 2 months just to be on the safe side.

I suspect that if/when the deposit schemes come in, LL's will move towards 6 week/a day under 2 months as a deposit to give themselves a bit more scope in case of problems.

Will this help tenants? or will more money be lost to admin that it currently is to "bad" landlords?