Looks like Letting Agent may not have protected our deposit

tbs624

Thanks for putting the link up Rabbit Mad. Shame that there are also some posters over on LLZ who seem to view it as acceptable to continue to offer weak excuses as to why a LL should still be able to wriggle off the hook.

Lack of communication between an LA and a LL? Let's extend that into other areas of law - "I thought the missus was doing it and she thought I was, sorry officer - sorry I have no MOT/car tax etc"

A technical issue preventing registration within the time limit? Yes, because the website of the deposit scheme is likely to be down for the whole 30 days and of course the LL/LA couldn't simply use snail mail as a viable alternative????

Gordon Bennett........

It ain't hard guys and girls - just get the job done as the rest of us manage to do.

We have technology - our all singing and dancing gadgetry can be set to send us reminders and if eve r the big techno-plug gets pulled then I find a tick list on a white board or even a note on a pad of paper/calendar hung on the wall will work well as a reminder.

RabbitMad

tbs624 wrote: »

Thanks for putting the link up Rabbit Mad. Shame that there are also some posters over on LLZ who seem to view it as acceptable to continue to offer weak excuses as to why a LL should still be able to wriggle off the hook.

Lack of communication between an LA and a LL? Let's extend that into other areas of law - "I thought the missus was doing it and she thought I was, sorry officer - sorry I have no MOT/car tax etc"

A technical issue preventing registration within the time limit? Yes, because the website of the deposit scheme is likely to be down for the whole 30 days and of course the LL/LA couldn't simply use snail mail as a viable alternative????

.

I think if you look at how judges interpreted the 1st set of rules, they basically looked for any reason not to apply the penalty assuming the LL/LA had tried to act reasonably.

If you were a LA or LL who was issuing dozens of agreements a week and all bar one had been properly protected then I think that is mitigation that should point to 1x penalty rather than 3x penalty.

I also think some of the LLZ posters were giving examples that might convince a judge.

Whether the LA/LL is in the wrong is irrelevant in some respects, it is what a specific judge in a specific court on the day thinks that matters, and reasonableness on the part of the claimant / defendant can swing a case.

As I have said I could see this case getting to court and the Judge awarding 1x the deposit as there was a technical breach but then awarding all costs against the OP as I don't think what the LA has done is all that bad. In fact over on LLZ there was a thread recently that argued whether re-protection was necessary between contracts as the tenancy started the day of the 1st contract and didn't end, under the wording on one piece of law until the tenant moved out, but under another law each separate contract was a different tenancy and re protection was necessary.

RabbitMad

http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?47243-12-month-AST-ending-in-a-couple-of-months-Tenancy-renewal-and-Deposit-implications - discussion on re-protection

jjlandlord

RabbitMad wrote: »

In fact over on LLZ there was a thread recently that argued whether re-protection was necessary between contracts as the tenancy started the day of the 1st contract and didn't end, under the wording on one piece of law until the tenant moved out, but under another law each separate contract was a different tenancy and re protection was necessary.

Every single new contract creates a new tenancy.
Unless a T vacates at end of fixed term tenancy, it's uncommon for a T to have a single tenancy during his stay at a property.
The discussion was that the DPS rules defined a tenancy as per the legal definition, but then throughout the T&C uses the term as referring to the whole stay of a T in the property.
Ie. IMHO the DPS's T&Cs are not very well drafted.

skintandscared_2

We have been in our rented property for 2.5 years now, and have only ever signed one agreement - at the start of the tenancy. I believe it was for 6 months, but could have been a year. The landlord used an agency to "find" us, but then self-managed since then. We've never signed a second agreement and have just had a rolling tenancy since the first one expired. I wouldn't imagine, in that scenario, that the landlord would have had to do anything with the deposit, would he? It would just stay under the first tenancy agreement, as that was never replaced with anything else?

jjlandlord

skintandscared wrote: »

I wouldn't imagine, in that scenario, that the landlord would have had to do anything with the deposit, would he? It would just stay under the first tenancy agreement, as that was never replaced with anything else?

All 3 deposit schemes do not require re-protection in this case, so it should be fine.
You should have been given the details of the deposit protection, which information you can use to check online whether your deposit is (still) protected.

swoolhouse

I recently moved out of a property that I rented privately for 14 months on a AST. At the start of the tenancy we paid the agent a months rent in advance and £895 bond.
I gave my landlord 2 months notice when I wanted to move out. The day before we moved out I thought id better drop him an email to ask what he wanted us to do with regards to coming and inspecting the property and handing the keys in.
My landlord asked me to hand the keys into the agent, which I did.
I emailed my landlord, to ask when he was going to give me my deposit back,he emailed back saying that on the 31/05/12 he had a contruction company go into the house to do an inspection. Attached to the email was a list with approx 200 repairs that needed carrying out on the house and that he would forward me photos of things that were relevant to me.
The day after I got an email with what he believed was relevant to me.
I questioned this and put my point across about allowing for general wear and tear. One of the things he complained about was the garden being overgrown. My argument was that he had left the property for nearly 2 weeks before getting the inspectors in.I have spoken to the agent who say dont actually manage the property, my landlord has told them that the quotes for work that needs doing will come to £500. The agent has my deposit which is not in a protection scheme this i have already checked.
I have been advised to take legal action, but I'm unsure who it would be against. Is it my landlord or the agent?
:mad::mad::mad:

DVardysShadow

swoolhouse wrote: »

I recently moved out of a property that I rented privately for 14 months on a AST. At the start of the tenancy we paid the agent a months rent in advance and £895 bond.
I gave my landlord 2 months notice when I wanted to move out. The day before we moved out I thought id better drop him an email to ask what he wanted us to do with regards to coming and inspecting the property and handing the keys in.
My landlord asked me to hand the keys into the agent, which I did.
I emailed my landlord, to ask when he was going to give me my deposit back,he emailed back saying that on the 31/05/12 he had a contruction company go into the house to do an inspection. Attached to the email was a list with approx 200 repairs that needed carrying out on the house and that he would forward me photos of things that were relevant to me.
The day after I got an email with what he believed was relevant to me.
I questioned this and put my point across about allowing for general wear and tear. One of the things he complained about was the garden being overgrown. My argument was that he had left the property for nearly 2 weeks before getting the inspectors in.I have spoken to the agent who say dont actually manage the property, my landlord has told them that the quotes for work that needs doing will come to £500. The agent has my deposit which is not in a protection scheme this i have already checked.
I have been advised to take legal action, but I'm unsure who it would be against. Is it my landlord or the agent?
:mad::mad::mad:

Please go here http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/forumdisplay.php?f=16 and use the 'new thread' button to start your own thread. You have dropped a straightforward deposit return question into a a thread which revolves around new deposit protection requirements. This is a 'thread hijack which will be to the detriment of helping you and to the detriment of discussing the matter this thread is really about.

DVardysShadow

jjlandlord wrote: »

Return of deposit does not impact non-protection penalty. In addition OP would need to specifically sue in court (not small claim) to claim this penalty.

If they offer to refund all disputed amounts, OP would be reasonable to take it and move on.

I think that the more reasonable closure to this issue would be for tenant and agent to agree that the tenancy never needed renewing, thus agent refunding deposit in full plus all renewal fees to date.

jjlandlord

Well, the tenancy was actually 'renewed'. So if OP was aware of the fee at the time and in effect agreed to it I don't see a reasonable ground to demand it back now.