Landlord's Deceit - What should I do...

nikki_angel

The way you posted you make like it is guarenteed that the courts will award 3x the deposit. This simply is NOT the case.

ETA - Sorry Tara, posting quickly so may have come across short Just didn't want the OP getting hopes up with the whole 3x penalty thing.

clutton_2

in any case the Localism Bill, just passed through parliament, has some new regulation concerning deposits.

Tara there is plenty of time to take the LL to court.. right now OP wants to stay where he is, with no rent increase, and he has the landlord by the proverbials.

danswer

Thanks to all for the previous advice. Here are some new developments 8 months after the original post!

So I carried on paying the existing rent (as always, on time); I had explained that the new rent was not legally authorised to start until the deposit situation was sorted and new contract signed. It was radio silence from the LL for 8 months! However, just recently, the LL finally lodged the deposit with a protection scheme, and of course I verified this directly with the protection scheme (DPS). Cheekily, the deposit information shows the higher rent, which was never legally in effect! The LL shifted the blame on the managing agents (even though there are no managing agents - it's a let only).

Now the LL claims that I owe him for 11 months of underpaid rent, and demand that I start paying the higher rent. The LL is threatening me that solicitors will be instructed to commence legal proceedings against me to recover it as well as any costs! Unbelievable!

Well, I've pretty much had it with this LL - I want to stop dealing with such a dishonest LL altogether and move out, but I want to make sure that I also get my deposit back. Even though the LL has finally lodged the deposit, it doesn't excuse the LL of breaching the law since the beginning of tenancy. I have written confirmation by all three government deposit schemes that no deposit had previously been protected under that address. If this goes to court, certainly this can be used as evidence.


What is the best way to deal with this situation?

Zorz_2

danswer wrote: »

However, just recently, the LL finally lodged the deposit with a protection scheme, and of course I verified this directly with the protection scheme (DPS). Cheekily, the deposit information shows the higher rent, which was never legally in effect! The LL shifted the blame on the managing agents (even though there are no managing agents - it's a let only).

Now the LL claims that I owe him for 11 months of underpaid rent, and demand that I start paying the higher rent. The LL is threatening me that solicitors will be instructed to commence legal proceedings against me to recover it as well as any costs! Unbelievable!

Cheeky b*st*rd...:rotfl:

Ignore his empty threats. I assume that all this time, you payed the rent that was agreed in your first tenancy contract. Did you sign anything else in the meantime? You didn't sign the AST he gave you last December, right? Your agreement on the 20% rent rise, was that orally?

If the only thing there is in writing is your original AST then you can safely tell him something along the lines "Go ahead, be my guest!"

In fact, since he took the deposit after 2007 and protected it only now (just to clarify: was that after 6th May 2012?), then he is in breach of the law and there is nothing he can do to get away! Thank god for the Localism Act! :beer::beer:

The downside is that you cannot easily sue him for a penalty. This cannot be done thru the small claims track, you have to pay upfront huge fees (over £1000)...

The upside is that he may not know that. If he tries to be nasty, send a Letter Before Action asking for your money back, pointing out that he failed to protect your deposit withing 30 days of receiving it (or even during the "grace period" after the Localism Act was enacted).

DVardysShadow

danswer wrote: »

Thanks to all for the previous advice. Here are some new developments 8 months after the original post!

Dis the Landlord ever send you a Section 13 Notice?

jjlandlord

The rent increase issue has nothing to do with the protection of the deposit.

From OP's original description IMO it is not so clear cut whether the increase was agreed or not.
Indeed, when the landlord proposed a rent increased, OP requested that everything be written down in a new contract, which the landlord sent.
Depending on how this played out, there may be an argument that the increase was agreed, perhaps even along with a new fixed term.

danswer

3 main facts:
1) The rent was negotiated verbally, but was never formally agreed in writing. At the time of negotiation, the LL gave me the impression he had already registered the deposit with DPS, which I later confirmed was not the case

2) LL sent a new agreement with rent increase, but I would not sign this because, as mentioned earlier: (1) the deposit the LL stated was lower the actual amount paid and (2) no deposit protection was provided at all.

3) No section 13 was ever sent.

Basically, the provisions were not met. The LL was supposed send me the deposit protection which he did not do, and the AST he tried to get me to sign not only had the wrong deposit amount (less than actual paid), but also had a "fake" DPS ID (this was confirmed with DPS).


LL is in the UK. Intention is to pay the last month's rent, move out and then try to get the deposit back. One question is whether the 1x or 3x deposit should be pursued before or after the tenancy ends (before I move out essentially)?

jjlandlord

danswer wrote: »

3 main facts:
1) The rent was negotiated verbally, but was never formally agreed in writing.

2) LL sent a new agreement with rent increase, but I would not sign this because...

Exactly the point I was making above: The rent increased was negotiated and agreed, and put in writing in a new tenancy agreement. The agreement is in writing as the new tenancy agreement was just produced to record the agreement.

On the other hand you never started paying the increase.

Not clear cut, imho.

danswer

Interesting point from LL perspective. When the rent was negotiated, the LL gave the impression that the deposit was protected. It seems disingenuous to have negotiated it when the LL in fact pocketed the deposit and never actually putting in deposit scheme as he so claimed. So the fact that he negotiated whilst he was in breach of his legal obligation - shouldn't this void any verbal agreement?

Of course, in light of the facts, and the flawed agreement sent, I would not sign this - as it would seem to absolve him of his legal responsibility, and screw me over on the significant amount of the deposit (because he stated a lower deposit amount, 4w, that what I actually paid, 6w)

So therefore, I continued the periodic statutory tenancy. He only placed the deposit in DPS in August of this year.

Fire_Fox

The experienced landlords here generally give advice in matters like this based on their knowledge of the legislation, not simply thinking as a landlord. In fact I have often seen them pour scorn on amateur or shyster landlords, run a search and see for yourself.

Negotiating the rent may be a separate issue from whether the damage deposit has been properly lodged, because you both had a say in what the increase was. Formally informing of a rent increase is not a separate issue, the landlord cannot enforce section X notices if he is already in breach of the law.

Given that your landlord has LIED on the AST, he may be less than keen to take this to court. Deal with him in writing only, quote the AST and relevant legislation.