New Landlord - Deposit Protection Schemes

nearlyretired2004

As a new ' first time' landlord letting privately (i.e. not through an agent) what are the recommendations around the three government backed deposit protection schemes.


Is any one better than the others?


Any reason not just to go for the cheapest of the three ..... they all seem to offer the same basic 'product' (insurance based rather than custodial.....) with the same benefits.


Thanks in advance for any responses.

00ec25

do you think you will earn more money from holding the deposit yourself compared to what it will cost you in insurance premiums?

why not just use the custodial scheme and have done with it - at the end of the day it will cost you nothing and there is not much to choose between

nearlyretired2004

Actually - a quick calculation shows that I CAN make (a little....) more than the cost of the premium (going with the cheapest scheme) ..... and I just like the idea of having control of the money...


Also if I'm reading correctly, only one of the three schemes actually offers a custodial service..... can I infer from this that the insurance based schemes are more popular?


and my question remains is any one scheme better than the others....?

marliepanda

nearlyretired2004 wrote: »

Actually - a quick calculation shows that I CAN make (a little....) more than the cost of the premium (going with the cheapest scheme) ..... and I just like the idea of having control of the money...

This bit strikes me as off.

Its not your money, so you having control of it shouldn't be an issue.

And on that note, any money you do make should be the tenants. Its their money, not yours.

G_M

nearlyretired2004 wrote: »

..... and I just like the idea of having control of the money...

I too think this indicates a dodgy attitude. Implies you want to be able to make your own decision about deductions at the end which is precisely why the schemes were introduced.

Given that deposit deductions should only be made for objectively valid reasons, reviewable by the arbitrators, your 'control' becomes irrelevant.

Unless you plan to ignore the rules and hope to bamboozle an innocent 1st time renter....

tunnel

Is it not enough the tenants you'll get will be paying you rent for your dodgy empire that you feel the need to squeeze them for a few quid more.

nearlyretired2004

Not often I feel the need to post like this, but the comments above have GREATLY p1ssed me off,when I came to the board for some genuine advice.....which is always forthcoming on the other areas of the forum I regularly post in.


In reverse order .... to the unpleasant lowlife who refers to my 'dodgy empire' ....... the house actually belongs to my elderly mother who has recently gone into a CARE HOME and we are renting it to help towards the extortionate fess the care home charge...


Next to G_M ...... We are actually renting to my mother's neighbour's daughter who we have known for circa 40 years .... (incidentally at slightly lower than market rate because we believe they will be good tenants.) Maybe foolishly we actually let her move in before we got the deposit..... BECAUSE SHE WAS HAVING TROUBLE GETTING IT BACK FROM PREVIOUS LANDLORD. The 'control' I would like is to actually be able to pay it back to her in a timely fashion at the end of the tenancy.......don't really give a monkey's whether you believe that or not.....


Marliepanda that bits for you as well.....


As for interest on the money standard tenancy agreements all state that any interest on the money belongs to the landlord.


QUOTE
The landlord and tenant agree that any interest accrued from the deposit shall be paid to the landlord.
UNQUOTE


Don't particularly care whether you like that or not either ....


Please don't waste your time posting if all you can do is snipe like this .....however if anyone has any genuinely helpful comments to make I will gratefully receive them.


(Oh.... and I accept the apologies of those mentioned above.)

tunnel

nearlyretired2004 wrote: »

Please don't waste your time posting if all you can do is snipe like this .....however if anyone has any genuinely helpful comments to make I will gratefully receive them.

Here's one, why not sell the house instead?

nearlyretired2004

Because if we sell, Mums care home fees will only be funded with the resulting money for about five years after which time the council will be responsible for funding ...... By renting we can extend the period which WE pay for.......

nearlyretired2004

The scenario hasn't changed ....only your interpretation of it.


I came on asking for some genuine advice - if you doubt someones' motives why not ask the question rather than jump to incorrect and insulting conclusions. (aimed at the others as well, not just you)


I see you post quite a bit on this board. Do you actually have any advice to offer?

Pixie5740

I don't think it matters which of the schemes you use for the tenant to get their deposit back in a timely fashion at the end of the tenancy. As long as you both agree on what, if any, deductions are to be made then it's fairly straight forward and quick.

Yes it was daft to let her move in before getting a deposit but it's done now Did you sign a tenancy agreement prior to moving in, get a gas safety certificate (if there's gas appliances in the property) and do an inventory? Even though you're renting to someone you know, in fact especially since you're renting to someone you know it's best to make sure all the necessary paperwork is in order.

Tunnel does have a point about selling the property. I know care home fees can be extortionate so will the rent even touch the sides especially since it's at below market rate?