Landlord refusing to pay back deposit

hayleyrafelt

I took out a 6 month tenancy agreement on 3/6/2010 and paid £550 deposit. In my contract it says that my deposit will be paid into the DPS under the DPS rules. The rules of the DPS is for the deposit to be secured within 14 days of the tenancy starting. I made several enquireis to my landlord about where my deposit was secured. After 9 months I had a very heated converstaion with her where i asked for my deposit back, as by law I can do this. She got quite aggresive and refused to do so, but relucatnatly payed it into the DPS on 2/6/2011. I have recieved confirmation of this. I advised her that I was getting into some financial difficulties and informed her I may be looking for somewhere cheaper to live. She was fine with this. I was in 1 month (£550) arreas. I called her to inform her I would be leaving and we came to a verbal agreement that if I payed back the arreas that day then she would agree to me moving out earlier than my 1 month notice. I payed the arreas. 1 day before moving I recieved an email from her (the first one, everything else had been done verbally over the phone or in person) informing me she did not agree with me moving early. I feel she has tricked me into not giving my deposit back. I loaned the money off my mother to pay the arreas in view that I would be receiving my deposit back. The house was left in even better condition than when I moved in, to which I took photos of.
Does she have the right to keep my deposit as she broke the law and the tenancy agreement by not paying my deposit into the scheme as stated in the contact. I feel like I was open and honest with her as if I wanted, I could have just moved out without paying her the arreas and just told her to take it from the deposit.
Any help would be great. £550 is a lot of money to me.
Thanks

BitterAndTwisted

Sounds like the landlord is entitled to retain your deposit if you didn't give the appropriate notice. NEVER rely on any assurances about anything unless you get it in writing. You have just learned this the hard way

hayleyrafelt

What about the fact that she did not pay the deposit into the scheme when she should have done?

BitterAndTwisted

She protected it albeit late so there's nothing you can do about it now.

poppy10_2

hayleyrafelt wrote: »

she broke the law and the tenancy agreement by not paying my deposit into the scheme as stated in the contact

Unfortunately recent court rulings have pretty much neutered the rules on deposit protection, by allowing landlords to protect the deposit at any time up to and including the point at which the tenant takes them to court for 3x the deposit for not lodging it in an approved deposit protection scheme. As she eventually did protect the deposit you won't have a case here.

The_Palmist

You left before the agreed term [verbal agreements don't count for much].
You were behind your rent.
You got your deposit back in the end.

So its OK for you to pay your rent late but not for the LL, when it comes to returning your deposit. I am not being insensitive to your financial difficulties but frankly speaking, its none of your LL's problems.

may_fair

hayleyrafelt wrote: »

I was in 1 month (£550) arreas. I called her to inform her I would be leaving and we came to a verbal agreement that if I payed back the arreas that day then she would agree to me moving out earlier than my 1 month notice. I payed the arreas. 1 day before moving I recieved an email from her (the first one, everything else had been done verbally over the phone or in person) informing me she did not agree with me moving early.

...Does she have the right to keep my deposit as she broke the law and the tenancy agreement by not paying my deposit into the scheme as stated in the contact.

The LL didn't break the law as such, as LL may protect the deposit 'late' without sanction.

The amount of money the LL may claim from the deposit depends on the following:

What date did you give notice and did you do it in writing?
What date did you move out?
Was the rent paid up to the date you vacated?

dippy

poppy10 wrote: »

Unfortunately recent court rulings have pretty much neutered the rules on deposit protection, by allowing landlords to protect the deposit at any time up to and including the point at which the tenant takes them to court for 3x the deposit for not lodging it in an approved deposit protection scheme. As she eventually did protect the deposit you won't have a case here.

The courts have not neutered the rules on deposit protection. They're trying to get the landlord to do the right thing, even if it's up to the day of the court hearing. This frees up valuable court time.

If the landlord protects the deposit right before the court hearing, they won't have to pay three times damages but they will still have to pay both their court costs/lawyers and the tenant's.

If I were the tenant in that case, I would use the most expensive lawyers I can find. :rotfl:

poppy10_2

dippy wrote: »

The courts have not neutered the rules on deposit protection. They're trying to get the landlord to do the right thing, even if it's up to the day of the court hearing. This frees up valuable court time.

There's no incentive now for landlords to protect the deposit, nor any real penalty for not doing so. For a landlord renting out a property now, there's no reason to protect the deposit unless and until the tenant serves notice of court action, at which point you could lodge the deposit and avoid any penalty. If (as in most cases) the tenant doesn't bother to pursue court action, the landlord can just keep hold of the deposit and do with it what he pleases.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

hayleyrafelt wrote: »

What about the fact that she did not pay the deposit into the scheme when she should have done?

Why should you be able to use that as an excuse for failing to pay rent on time, moving early, and then expecting a deposit back?

may_fair

dippy wrote: »

The courts have not neutered the rules on deposit protection. They're trying to get the landlord to do the right thing, even if it's up to the day of the court hearing. This frees up valuable court time.

If the landlord protects the deposit right before the court hearing, they won't have to pay three times damages but they will still have to pay both their court costs/lawyers and the tenant's.

If I were the tenant in that case, I would use the most expensive lawyers I can find. :rotfl:

Cost awards are entirely at the discretion of the court, and to advise a T to deliberately engage unnecessarily expensive counsel in an attempt to penalize the LL is a tactic which could easily backfire, particularly so given recent binding Court of Appeal judgments.