Are landlords permitted to raise the amount of deposit under dispute?

Shandz

A full background is detailed below - but if you don't have time to read it, the short version is:


[FONT=&quot]Are letting agents or landlords permitted to artificially and arbitrarily raise the sum under dispute, with no supporting evidence, in order to apply pressure to a tenant to settle for the original disputed amount?[/FONT]





[FONT=&quot]We are having problems relating to the mishandling of our deposit following the end of our tenancy agreement and would like to know how we should complain and how to find out if the landlord or letting agents have broken the law.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot] Background[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]We received a Schedule of Damages by email on 7th November indicating that £270 was under dispute out of a total deposit of £1010 – no invoice or quote was attached to justify the amount of £270.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Further to receiving this email, we stated that we would be disputing the £270 as we have the original inventory and pictures which we believed showed that the damage was pre-existing. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]We received another email from the letting agents on the 14th November 2011 with the same Schedule of Damages attached which read:-[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot] “[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Dear [Tenants][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Further to your email I have been in negotiations with your Landlord with regards to a settlement figure on the damages to the carpet according to the checkout report and have put forward your comments. The Landlord would like a settlement agreed to and would like to give you the option to accept 270 as the settlement figure in total.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Moving on from this if you are not happy to settle on this amount he wants the entire deposit held back as compensation for the damage to the carpet. I would advise if you are not happy with the settlement amount that you contact MyDeposits as soon as possible via the following link [mydeposits.co.uk] or phone them”[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The question which we would like answered is:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Are letting agents or landlords permitted to artificially and arbitrarily raise the sum under dispute, with no supporting evidence in order to apply pressure to a tenant to settle for the original disputed amount?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]We believe that the undisputed sum of £740 should now have been returned to us and should not be able to be used as leverage for the landlord to pressurise us into settling for the original undisputed amount.[/FONT]

• [FONT=&quot]Have the landlord/letting agent broken the law? [/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot]How should we proceed with our complaint? [/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot]What happens if a landlord makes a claim for money that is substantially more than justified from the evidence – can they really keep your money tied up?[/FONT]

CapJ

I won't pretend to understand the scheme rules, but it seems to me that they are clearly trying to get around any possible problems by dressing up the 270 GPB as an offer to settle with the total damages at 1010 GPB. I doubt there is anything you can do about this except go through the arbitration process.

jjlandlord

If I understand you have documents proving that the proposed deductions are £270 (that's what the schedule of damages lists, it does should not list disputed amounts since that is for you to do), which you dispute, and you have an inventory to support your claim (though it is for the landlord to prove damage).

Contact MyDeposit to open a dispute accordingly.

Shandz

jjlandlord wrote: »

If I understand you have documents proving that the proposed deductions are £270 (that's what the schedule of damages lists, it does should not list disputed amounts since that is for you to do), which you dispute, and you have an inventory to support your claim (though it is for the landlord to prove damage).

Contact MyDeposit to open a dispute accordingly.

Yes you are correct, I understand what you are saying - my problem is that the landlord is saying that he will increase the proposed deductions to include the full deposit in an attempt to replace the carpet - even though the old inventory documents the stains to the carpet.

So I suppose my question becomes, can the landlord prevent us accessing our money for several months without presenting any evidence to back up his claim on the money - we don't seem to be very well protected.

G_M

The LL can claim whatever deductions he wants, at any time until resolution.

Either you negotiate an agreement, or you go through the dispute process.

If you dispute, then
a) the LL must prove his case
b) you can present evidence to counter the claim
c) you can use the late changes to the claim to discredit the claim as a whole
d) you can demand evidence from the LL to justify all his deductions

Shandz

G_M wrote: »

The LL can claim whatever deductions he wants, at any time until resolution.

Either you negotiate an agreement, or you go through the dispute process.

If you dispute, then
a) the LL must prove his case
b) you can present evidence to counter the claim
c) you can use the late changes to the claim to discredit the claim as a whole
d) you can demand evidence from the LL to justify all his deductions

Yes, we think we have a very strong case and would expect to do very well in a dispute. I don't dispute what you are saying, but I am shocked that any landlord at the end of a tenancy agreement can simply refuse to give back any money and therefore delay the tenants receiving any of their deposit back.

Perhaps more importantly, it hands the landlord an extremely potent weapon at the end of any tenancy: "Agree to pay for these deductions, or I will not pay any of the deposit".

This is not so bad for us in this case - we have sufficient funds available to have two deposits tied up (we in another rented property).

What if the tenants needed the money?
Or were uncomfortable taking the risk?
Or were old?
Or vulnerable in some other way such as having poor english or learning difficulties?

I understand what is being said - but in my opinion this is a pretty big hole in the tenancy deposit system and leaves the tenant vulnerable to aggressive landlords.

jjlandlord

Shandz wrote: »

So I suppose my question becomes, can the landlord prevent us accessing our money for several months without presenting any evidence to back up his claim on the money - we don't seem to be very well protected.

Obviously if you do not take any action LL can hold on to the money for ever... As can anyone owing you money.

Shandz wrote: »

Perhaps more importantly, it hands the landlord an extremely potent weapon at the end of any tenancy: "Agree to pay for these deductions, or I will not pay any of the deposit".

No really as T can start a dispute before deposit scheme (that's why there were made compulsory) or sue for the money: In both case it will be for the landlord to defend the deductions.

G_M

Shandz wrote: »

Yes, we think we have a very strong case and would expect to do very well in a dispute. I don't dispute what you are saying, but I am shocked that any landlord at the end of a tenancy agreement can simply refuse to give back any money and therefore delay the tenants receiving any of their deposit back.

Perhaps more importantly, it hands the landlord an extremely potent weapon at the end of any tenancy: "Agree to pay for these deductions, or I will not pay any of the deposit".

This is not so bad for us in this case - we have sufficient funds available to have two deposits tied up (we in another rented property).

What if the tenants needed the money?
Or were uncomfortable taking the risk?
Or were old?
Or vulnerable in some other way such as having poor english or learning difficulties?

I understand what is being said - but in my opinion this is a pretty big hole in the tenancy deposit system and leaves the tenant vulnerable to aggressive landlords.

The tenancy deposit legislation of 2007 has made things 1000 times better for tenants than it was before.

There are indeed serious flaws in the legislation which need addressing, but your MP would be in a better position to do something than we would on this forum.

Shandz

jjlandlord wrote: »

Obviously if you do not take any action LL can hold on to the money for ever... As can anyone owing you money.



No really as T can start a dispute before deposit scheme (that's why there were made compulsory) or sue for the money: In both case it will be for the landlord to defend the deductions.

Yes you can get the money back but only after several months, having to go through the dispute process or the courts - and the landlord could have little or no evidence to support this claim.

I'm not saying you can't get the money back - the point I am trying to make is that the landlord can cause the tenant to be without money that is rightfully theirs for months. This is something they can do with no evidence and use the threat of this as a bargaining chip when trying to negotiate a settlement.

Shandz

G_M wrote: »

The tenancy deposit legislation of 2007 has made things 1000 times better for tenants than it was before.

There are indeed serious flaws in the legislation which need addressing, but your MP would be in a better position to do something than we would on this forum.

My thoughts exactly - this is something I may well take up with them. My original intention when posting was to establish whether or not the landlord could behave in this way.

jjlandlord

Shandz wrote: »

Yes you can get the money back but only after several months, having to go through the dispute process or the courts - and the landlord could have little or no evidence to support this claim.

I'm not saying you can't get the money back - the point I am trying to make is that the landlord can cause the tenant to be without money that is rightfully theirs for months. This is something they can do with no evidence and use the threat of this as a bargaining chip when trying to negotiate a settlement.

Is this a rant or plain whining?