Landlord refusing to repay deposit, no Inventory, no deposit scheme.

Stakkertoo

Fire_Fox wrote: »

The court will not see seven days as sufficient with post each way.



So you can't prove you ever gave the landlord the deposit? Have you anything in writing that the landlord accepted the deposit was reassigned each time and has not refunded someone else and forgotten to take a new deposit from you? Is the deposit mentioned in all the ASTs? If your name was not on the AST you may not be classed as a tenant, were you paying rent to the landlord yourself?

Originally we (me and another housemate) were paying our rent to my ex-girlfriend (as she was the 'lead tenant'), however since 2009, I have paid the rent directly to the landlord as I have been classed as the 'lead tenant'.

The deposit is definitely mentioned on the ASTs, including the more recent ASTs which bear my name, and no deposit has been paid out, it has rolled over each time, which is why it's in my name now. My housemate is owed part of the deposit, but of course its my responsibility to recover the total.

edit: i definitely have the original AST and may even have the receipt for the original deposit at home. I shall check this evening.

Yorkie1

I haven't read the detail of the claim issues, but thought I'd flag one thing which I can't see having been mentioned previously.

As I understand it, the small claims court / straightforward claim track can only be used to claim the deposit return.

But any claim for the penalty for failure to protect the deposit cannot go under that route and must go via a more complicated and expensive (court fees and, possibly, court costs) route.

I am not aware that this distinction has changed since the Localism Act has been implemented.

The standard advice was to stick to the deposit return and not complicate / prolong matters unnecessarily.

Stakkertoo

Yorkie1 wrote: »

I haven't read the detail of the claim issues, but thought I'd flag one thing which I can't see having been mentioned previously.

As I understand it, the small claims court / straightforward claim track can only be used to claim the deposit return.

But any claim for the penalty for failure to protect the deposit cannot go under that route and must go via a more complicated and expensive (court fees and, possibly, court costs) route.

I am not aware that this distinction has changed since the Localism Act has been implemented.

The standard advice was to stick to the deposit return and not complicate / prolong matters unnecessarily.

Okay, I did wonder about that last night, as Small Claims courts only deal with claims up to £5000. A claim of 3x the deposit would be beyond that. I did think whether that would mean I should only request my deposit repaid and at most, 2x the deposit as a penalty; a total of £4800.

Clearly I will have to speak to the borough council's housing legal advice before I lodge my claim, as I really just want my deposit back asap.

Werdnal

Very true Yorkie, but there is no harm in OP writing a nice polite letter to the LL, pointing out the error of their ways allows a potential claim of up to 3x the deposit value, plus return of original deposit amount in full, even if they ultimately decide not to persue the penalty. They do not have to confirm that they definately will go to court for the additional claim, just suggest to the LL that the option is there and the law is on the tenant's side in this scenario.

Surprising how the thought of the possibility of a court claim for the non-protection will generate the return of deposit without any further questions asked

Stakkertoo

Fire_Fox wrote: »

The court may not see seven days as sufficient with post each way.



Eeep, messy! So you can't prove you ever gave the landlord the deposit? Have you anything in writing that the landlord accepted the deposit was reassigned each time and has not refunded someone else? Is the deposit mentioned in all the ASTs? If your name was not on the AST you may not be classed as a tenant, were you paying rent to the landlord yourself?

Okay, last night I located the original AST from 2007 with just my ex-girlfriend's name on it. This states a deposit of £1600 was recieved. I couldn't find the AST from 2009 when I took over, but I did find the AST from 2010 when the landlord put the rent up by £200pcm. This has my name and the name of the housemate of that time, (who in the margin, brings attention to the section mentioning the non-existent 'schedule of contents/inventory) This also mentions the £1600 deposit being held by the landlord.

I also have a letter from when the landlord amended the contract to include my most recent housemate's name in March this year. It mentions clearly the deposit of £1600; the landlord writes, "As agreed this is the original amount paid in August 2007 and which has been an ongoing and remains as a matter directly between you, as the main tenant, and myself, as the landlord."

That should be enough info for the Small Claims Action?

(incidentally, she changed the format of the AST between 2007 and 2010. From the National Landlords Association, to the Small Landlords Association. Only the first one mentions the Tenancy Deposit scheme. Not that it matters....)

Stakkertoo

Werdnal wrote: »

Very true Yorkie, but there is no harm in OP writing a nice polite letter to the LL, pointing out the error of their ways allows a potential claim of up to 3x the deposit value, plus return of original deposit amount in full, even if they ultimately decide not to persue the penalty. They do not have to confirm that they definately will go to court for the additional claim, just suggest to the LL that the option is there and the law is on the tenant's side in this scenario.

Surprising how the thought of the possibility of a court claim for the non-protection will generate the return of deposit without any further questions asked

So perhaps I shoudl mention the possibility of the 3x penalty in the 'Notice of Action', but leave it off the N1 Small Claims form (just claim for 100% of the deposit?) this is the other way around from what I was led to believe earlier. :huh:

Stakkertoo

Fire_Fox wrote: »

If you agree to several small deductions you risk leaving people thinking maybe you did not treat the place with respect. It's like people telling their doctor how much they drink or smoke, it's often underestimated. That is not the main issue here, she completely ignored the law, I don't think your notice to quit was even legal since your deposit was not lodged.

Okay, just to go back to this...on the Shelter checklist it mentions that in my Small Claims Action i should list deductions and whether i agree with them etc.

To clarify, because I am requesting my deposit back, and highlighting the lack of tenancy deposit scheme do I need to leave all the other stuff out, and just send copies of my ASTs showing that the deposit was held, and proof that my deposit wasn't registered with any of the schemes?

This isn't a discussion on the deposit, more the legal obligation of the landlord to lodge my deposit in the scheme, right? I should keep this simple and clear?

Stakkertoo

(Sorry for the running commentary, but the helpful people in this thread have really given me such good advice, and made me feel far more positive about pursuing this!)

I've just emailed each Tenancy Deposit scheme to request confirmation that the deposit wasn't lodged.

I don't think need to wait for these for the Letter Before Action, rather they are for the Small Claims action which will be at least a week away depending on the landlord's response.

Stakkertoo

I notice in the template 'Letter before action' that I'm using it says :

[FONT=&quot]If I do not receive payment from you by xxx,[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]I intend to issue court proceedings in the County Court without further notice. I reserve the right to include a claim for interest, costs and compensation in addition to the amount of the deposit.[/FONT]

Sorry if I'm being an idiot, but the fact I am using the Small Claims court, would it be correct to say so in this paragraph or is 'County Court' correct?

Fire_Fox

It is a small claims action/ case heard in the county court, small claims court doesn't exist it's just a colloquialism. The proof you have about the deposit sounds spot on! If it were me I wouldn't agree to any deductions, you are entitled to a full refund because the landlord failed to lodge the deposit.