New Landlord - Deposit Protection Schemes

lighting_up_the_chalice

Trying to save the council money AND facilitating the return of the deposit in a timely manner?

If you've known the tenant for 40 years, believe her to be a good tenant, want to retain the deposit just so that you can ensure it's speedy return, I guess the only question would be.... Why bother taking the deposit in the first place?

nearlyretired2004

Clearly no one with any actual advice here..... just a bunch of hard done by tenants with chips on their shoulders.....


Please take this as a general reply to all of you.....

nearlyretired2004

Just thought I'd do you the courtesy of a reply as you were the only person to reply in an inoffensive manner.


First paragraph....this is more the sort of information I wanted - but more, how do the schemes themselves vary, if at all as they all have different costs.


Second paragraph - Yes, we had an assured shorthold tenancy agreement in place and yes to all your other questions - all paperwork is in order.


Even at a little below market rate, one months rent will pay approximately one weeks care home fees.... so renting will extend the 'life' of Mum' s money by approx. 25% (actually a little less, as rent is calendar monthly and care home fees are weekly.....)

topdaddy_2

nearlyretired2004 wrote: »

Clearly no one with any actual advice here..... just a bunch of hard done by tenants with chips on their shoulders.....


Please take this as a general reply to all of you.....

Youve been told theyre all pretty much the same. Because theyre supposed to pretty much be the same. Independant and fair to both parties involved. Money to be made wont come from deposits.

jjlandlord

This forum is very much 'consumer oriented' in the sense that many seem to oppose the 'good' tenants to the 'bad' landlords (how dare you run a business and make money?)

I do understand your concerns re. control of deposit.
In a custodial scheme you might have trouble getting a single penny if the tenant ignore requests, whereas in an insurance scheme you hold the money as long and until the tenant raises a dispute.

Considerations, I think, are:
- both are the same if the tenant raises a dispute
- you need to pay to use an insurance scheme, though you may balance that with an overall admin fee charged to tenant.

IMHo, if you are happy with the costs do go for an insurance scheme.

Make sure you check the deposit's status and follow their procedure whenever a new tenancy is created (this includes a statutory periodic AST)

nearlyretired2004

Forgive me if I missed something amidst all the sniping but I don't think anyone had mentioned that they were 'all pretty much the same' (except perhaps Pixie inferring it in her first para....)


Not sure I understand your last sentence, but if you are suggesting that I'm trying to make money from the deposit....I'm not. I just want to cover the cost of using the scheme. Apologies if I've mis-interpreted that.

topdaddy_2

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)

Whilst on the subject of quoting^

nearlyretired2004 wrote: »

Forgive me if I missed something amidst all the sniping but I don't think anyone had mentioned that they were 'all pretty much the same' (except perhaps Pixie inferring it in her first para....)


Not sure I understand your last sentence, but if you are suggesting that I'm trying to make money from the deposit....I'm not. I just want to cover the cost of using the scheme. Apologies if I've mis-interpreted that.

Maybe quote properly. Convesation will flow better. And im not suggesting. You said it in post number three....

nearlyretired2004

My god - what are you doing here!!


A balanced and very helpful reply - exactly the sort of response I thought I might have got before!


I have no intention of charging tenant an admin fee but should be able to cover the insurance costs of the cheapest scheme with interest earned on the deposit - the other two schemes I wouldn't quite cover costs.


Guess from your name u are a landlord? Any actual experience of the schemes and ....back, I think, to my original question....any reason not to go for the cheapest?

nearlyretired2004

In post three I did put ' a little' in brackets ......


As I've said a few times now.....just trying to cover the costs of the scheme, not MAKE money.

topdaddy_2

nearlyretired2004 wrote: »

In post three I did put ' a little' in brackets ......


As I've said a few times now.....just trying to cover the costs of the scheme, not MAKE money.

Making a little money is making money.