Deposit Safety Scheme Exemption??

tubie22

Hello,

I recently moved out of a 1 bed flat that I lived in with my boyfriend whilst we were both at uni. It was a uni managed property; the uni was essentially our landlord.

We paid a deposit when moving into the property and are now having difficulties with being charged for damages we didnt create and are disputing them.

I decided to go to my local CAB to see if they could help me write a dispute letter up and they mentioned the Deposit safety scheme. It was the first time I had heard of it, so decided to research it and the Housing Act 2004.

I contacted my uni and asked if our deposits had been placed in a deposit safety scheme and was told they weren't and that the deposit safety schemes did not apply to the university manages properties.

Is this correct?

I just find it a little hard to believe; the official legislation for Housing Act 2004 says any deposit paid to a landlord for a short hold lease must be put into the deposit safety scheme. I have also researched other universities throughout England that all state that, for their uni accommodation, they use the deposit schemes for their students. So why would it apply to some unis and not others?


Any help would be great. Thanks.

tbs624

If the Uni lets its properties on a license rather than on an AST then they are right.

Deposit legislation applies to Assured Shorthold Tenancies only (rent below 100k pa)

Was your agreement an AST?

Edit: currently only applicable to properties in Eng/Wales: deposit registration on its way for Scotland.

G_M

Additionally to tbs's point above, it is academic (sorry about the pun!) now.

Since the deposit is not registered (irrespective of whether it should or needn't have been), your only redress is either

* to negotiate an agreed solution with the university accomodation office (or whoever manages) or

* to go to the Small Claims Court

tubie22

I'm not sure about the AST or license. We rented the property from the university, the owner of the property rents it to the university. The contract was for 50 weeks and doesn't end until July, but we left early after paying all rent. The rent was definitely below 100k pa (£680 p/m).

We are being charged ludicrous amounts for damage we didnt even know existed; £100 for a bath plug, £250 for a new sofa (there was nothing wrong with the old one, except for a faulty leg which was there when we moved in and which my other half fixed twice and reported to the uni), almost £100 in cleaning charges for a tiny 1 bed flat that we absolutely scrubbed before we left. We do accept some of the claims and are happy to pay them because we knew we would have to, but the others are nothing to do with us. We are also being charged for a mould issue which was evident when we moved in. We did clean it with bleach and did report it and were told to open the windows (it was November and they were single glazed) and move furniture from the walls and that's all they could tell us.

They are basically charging us so much in damages that both of our deposits are completely gone (£200 each). I was just really under the impression that Deposit Schemes had to be used when any deposit was given for a short hold lease, which is what we had.

The University accommodation services have been shady with us from the start of our tenancy and I am very very reluctant to let them continue to walk all over us and take money from us when they have no right to.

Thanks.

tbs624

Confusion here - on my part- you say

tubie22 wrote: »

I'm not sure about the AST or license. We rented the property from the university, the owner of the property rents it to the university. The contract was for 50 weeks and doesn't end until July, but we left early after paying all rent. The rent was definitely below 100k pa (£680 p/m).

but then you also say

. I was just really under the impression that Deposit Schemes had to be used when any deposit was given for a short hold lease, which is what we had.

My bolding. An AST is an Assured Shorthold Tenancy. Do you have a copy of your contract? If you want to able to wave the Uni's alleged shortcomings at them you need to have your facts straight. If you had an AST then your deposit absolutely should have been scheme registered.

Was a jointly signed inventory completed when you moved in and do you have a copy of it?

Do you have any photos from moving in /out?

A LL cannot use your tenancy deposit as a kind of new for old insurance policy. Go onto the mydeposits website - there is a guide on there on fair wear and tear which explains about betterment and apportionment. It's contents are relevant whether or not your own deposit has been scheme registered.

N79

tbs624 wrote: »

Confusion here - on my part- you say but then you also say
My bolding. An AST is an Assured Shorthold Tenancy. Do you have a copy of your contract? If you want to able to wave the Uni's alleged shortcomings at them you need to have your facts straight. If you had an AST then your deposit absolutely should have been scheme registered.

If the LL was the university (and not some spin off company) then the tenancy is unlikely to be an AST whatever it says on the contact by virtue of Para 8 Schedule 1 of the Housing Act 1988.

If its not an AST then it is either a common law tenancy or a licence. Either way, deposit protection is not required.

So OP - who exactly is your LL?

tubie22 wrote: »

It was a uni managed property; the uni was essentially our landlord.

is not really specific enough.

tubie22

N79 wrote: »

So OP - who exactly is your LL?

The University is our LL. I don't really know how I can make that any clearer...

A private owner of the property lets the property to the uni. The uni lets it to its students. The Uni is the Landlord. We pay rent to the Uni, the deposit was paid to the uni, the uni inspects the property etc.

Yes we do have an inventory.

I'm getting the impression that there is no case here, in terms of the Deposit Protection Scheme.

IF that is so, then I would really like to go about disputing the charges made against us in full, as some of them are ridiculous.

Werdnal

tubie22 wrote: »

IF that is so, then I would really like to go about disputing the charges made against us in full, as some of them are ridiculous.

Read post number 3!

tubie22

Werdnal wrote: »

Read post number 3!

Yep, got that. Was just making a statement.

tbs624

N79 wrote: »

If its not an AST then it is either a common law tenancy or a licence. Either way, deposit protection is not required.

agreed - see my comment in post 2:)

tbs624

tubie - you have now confirmed that there was an inventory completed at the start: presumably you checked that it was a correct statement of the property's condition before signing it?

Go back through it and check specifically what it says about each item for which you are potentially being charged. Then go on to mydeposits website to access their Guide as I suggested above.

Even where you may have caused damage or deterioration which can't be attributed to fair wear and tear LL must take into account the quality of the item, the age and condition of the item at the start of the tenancy, how long it would reasonably be expected to last in a rental, plus how long the [edit:tenancy] was for. LL cannot simply expect you to pay the total replacement cost.