Rent dispute

princeofpounds

However, given that it was set up as a standing order and I did not change it, I fail to see how it could have been missed.

There is no way it could have been missed, unless you bank mucked up (unlikely) or you yourself agreed to change the rental date.

It is the rental period change that is causing problems.

Kathymel, I think you are missing why people are going down the avenue they are. You originally said the rent due date was supposed to have changed. This doesn't alter anything.

Now you are saying the rental period dates are supposed to have changed. These are entirely different things.

What is more, if you never signed new contract or agreed a variation of that contract, then they could never have changed.

jjlandlord

The PM suggested that perhaps payment wasn't taken around Mar 2006 when they changed their system. He pointed out that, this being the case, I also would owe rent from 19-31 Mar 2006, but that they would waive this if I paid the recent amount.

Call me cynical but the above suggests that they c...ed up in 2006 (there system has nothing to do with OP making the payment but might mean they did not account for it properly) and that they are trying it on. Or they are inventing a story to make OP pay extra now, in which case they are also trying it on.

AnnieO1234 wrote: »

I believe any statute of limitations doesn't apply here as you were contractually bound to make the rental payments, it's not like a sudden chase for non-invoicing as they wouldn't invoice you monthly for rent.

A debt always arise by contract or statute... The Limitation Act is especially for such cases.

Kathymel

AnnieO1234 wrote: »

Have you actually spoken to your bank? Are you absolutely certain every standing order has been met, remembering if you lacked funds it would not have been?

Aren't you supposed to receive a balance statement yearly or am I imagining that?

I believe any statute of limitations doesn't apply here as you were contractually bound to make the rental payments, it's not like a sudden chase for non-invoicing as they wouldn't invoice you monthly for rent.

You would not be able to see the bank account statements, well you could try but I am certain that they will hide behind commercial sensitivity.

Xx

I asked my bank for copies of statements from the period and they quoted the data protection act as the reason they did not keep info longer than 6 years.

I do receive a monthly invoice from my landlord and any failure to pay is quickly picked up on. On two occasions over 12 years my landlord has had cause to contact me about payments. Once, when I switched banks and the SOs and DDs did not get switched quickly enough and once when I failed to increase the amount of the SO in time for a rent increase. On both occasions I corrected the mistakes as soon as I could.

I have never been contacted regarding a failed payment in 2006, something that makes me believe there wasn't one.

Kathymel

princeofpounds wrote: »

There is no way it could have been missed, unless you bank mucked up (unlikely) or you yourself agreed to change the rental date.



Kathymel, I think you are missing why people are going down the avenue they are. You originally said the rent due date was supposed to have changed. This doesn't alter anything.

Now you are saying the rental period dates are supposed to have changed. These are entirely different things.

What is more, if you never signed new contract or agreed a variation of that contract, then they could never have changed.

Sorry, I wasn't aware I was confusing things. My original rent due date was the 19th of the month and that is when I have always paid. The landlord changed their system so that all rents were charged from the 1st of each month but didn't change their collection date so I continued to pay on the 19th.

I've never agreed to any contract changes.

princeofpounds

My original rent due date was the 19th of the month and that is when I have always paid. The landlord changed their system so that all rents were charged from the 1st of each month but didn't change their collection date so I continued to pay on the 19th.

I've never agreed to any contract changes.

Thanks for the clarification.

Whatever they changed their date to doesn't matter in the slightest then.

Your rental period was always the same (starting on the same day every month that your tenancy started on). Your due date was always the same (whatever was stated on your contract - often just 'in advance').

Number of payments = number of rental periods calculation should therefore be straightforward.

G_M

As Prince says above

* your tenancy started on the 19th
* from the start, you paid on the 19th, to cover the advance period running from 19th to 18th each month
* you have always continued to pay on the 19th, thus always covering the advance period running from 19th to 18th each month
* you made a final payment on 19h April (covering the advance period running from 19th April to 18th May)
* you moved out on 10th May.

Correct?

The only isue I can see is that you are attempting to end the tenancy mid-period. You cannot do this without the landlord's consent.

So if the LL agreed to end the tenancy on 10th May, and to only charge rent to this date, then he owes you a refund.

If not, you owe rent to 18th May, and no refund is due.

Kathymel

Just to add some more colour to this ...

Despite being a respected household name, my landlord has consistently failed to uphold their end of our contract.

External upkeep covered in the contract has not been completed as scheduled.

Repairs have not been carried out in a timely manner resulting in two separate periods of at least two years each where serious damp and mould issues have made the house unhealthy to live in. The most recent damp has been a contributory factor to my moving house.

A carpet was damaged by a contractor employed by my landlord approximately 4-5 years ago. The properties manager assured me it would be replaced. I am still waiting despite repeated reminders. I have informed him that my leaving the property does not absolve the landlord from replacing the carpet, but that, given my new house has a smaller stairs and landing area, I will not expect them to pay for a carpet of the original area. He tried to use it as a lever to force me to carry out work on the property. (If I choose a cheap carpet, he won't make me paint a wall). He also stated that the carpet was worn now so they wouldn't have to pay so much - it was nearly new 4-5 years ago.

I have asked for my deposit to be returned but it has been hinted that the manager will withhold it until I produce an estimate for a cheap carpet. This suggests that the amount of the deposit may change depending on the cost of the carpet. I have told them to come up with an estimate themselves for me to consider (still waiting to hear back on that).

The tenancy handbook states that the property should be left in good decorative order (it is extremely good), whilst the tenancy agreement states that I might be asked to apply "two coats of good emulsion" but does not mention colour. The walls already have two good coats. The manager has tried to insist I must return some of it it back to 'magnolia'. He suggested this 3 days before I was due to move, which I responded was an unreasonably short notice for such things, given the chaos rife at that stage of a move. I did make good (very good) any screw holes left by removing shelves and touched up any damaged paint (apart from where the paint had been removed by years of mould damage).

The standard of the property has improved greatly whilst I have been a tenant due to work I have carried out on it with the consent of the landlord. This has involved unblocking and restoring an original fireplace, improving storage areas, demolishing a derelict shed and creating two stunning gardens from what was little more than wasteland.

I know that none of the above is really relevant to the issue I am asking for advice about, but I feel very strongly that I have been an exemplary tenant over the last 12 years and would hate for anyone to think that I am trying to pull a fast one on my landlord.

Kathymel

princeofpounds wrote: »

Thanks for the clarification.

Whatever they changed their date to doesn't matter in the slightest then.

Your rental period was always the same (starting on the same day every month that your tenancy started on). Your due date was always the same (whatever was stated on your contract - often just 'in advance').

Number of payments = number of rental periods calculation should therefore be straightforward.

Thanks, Prince.

That's what I think. Just wish I could prove I had paid. Or that they cannot prove that I haven't.

G_M

as you say, none of the above is relevant to their claim for rent arrears against the deposit, or your claim for a rent refund.

Kathymel

G_M wrote: »

As Prince says above

* your tenancy started on the 19th
* from the start, you paid on the 19th, to cover the advance period running from 19th to 18th each month
* you have always continued to pay on the 19th, thus always covering the advance period running from 19th to 18th each month
* you made a final payment on 19h April (covering the advance period running from 19th April to 18th May)
* you moved out on 10th May.

Correct?

The only isue I can see is that you are attempting to end the tenancy mid-period. You cannot do this without the landlord's consent.

So if the LL agreed to end the tenancy on 10th May, and to only charge rent to this date, then he owes you a refund.

If not, you owe rent to 18th May, and no refund is due.

Thank you too, GM.

It seems very clear cut put like that.

I suppose my worry is that they will produce a typed list showing the absence of a payment in 2006 and I have nothing to show them. Can I question its validity and ask for more proof?