Sue ll for non-protection of deposit?

dancingfairy

My landlord is actually O.K. I do not know why he has not protected the deposit. He claims he has researched his responsibilities (Which I'm not entirely convinced about). I don't actually think I'll have any problems getting my deposit back. It's more the principle. What's the point of having a law/rule/regulation if people can just ignore it when it suits them? I all for tenants rights so i sort of feel I should make a stand, on principle.
I can afford to pay the court fees. I could probably find 1,000 pounds but it would depend on my chances of success as well. I haven't heard any success stories (or even otherwise). Also it is unfortunate that a ruling designed to protect tenants/give them redress is actually financially unaffordable for many
I doubt I will sue my landlord unless he decides to sell up whilst I am in situ or anything else silly.
df

dancingfairy

An interesting dilema, none the less
df

sandsni

Have you checked with the schemes to see if your deposit is protected? It could be that the LL has just been remiss in sending you the prescribed information. Admittedly that's still wrong but you could give him a chance to rectify his mistake.


If it's not in any of the schemes you could, politely, remind him of his responsibilities and ask him to protect the deposit now if he hasn't already. He might actually be grateful for the reminder and the chance to put things right.


If he point blank refuses then I would be wondering why. The deposit is the tenant's money, not the LL's, until the tenancy ends (and whatever arrangement is reached regarding return or retention of all or some of said deposit). It's just as easy to let the deposit scheme hold it as to hold it in his own account.


I'm neither LL nor tenant, but my parents are LLs.


Ultimately it depends on whether your goal is to have a decent LL/T relationship (assuming the LL is otherwise decent) or to grab a few quid for yourself and/or prove a point.