Letter Before Action to return unprotected deposit.

thequant

jjlandlord wrote: »

Interests are to be claimed in court, and for the court to decide on. They are not part of the debt per se.

I don't think there is a need to mention interests in a letter before action.
Perhaps one could say that if payment is not made then court proceedings would seek the deposit, costs, and interests (which is of course standard but can help the debtor see reason).

JJ is correct here, interest charges are levied by the court and do not form part of the debt.


Official rate is 8%, however unofficially the courts have been awarding 4% when challenged.

thequant

G_M wrote: »

True. My reasoning was that if the OP does subsequently go to court he may wish to then claim the interest. Thus the 'offer' to accept the deposit without interest should be without prohudice to any subsequent claim.

A letter market 'without prejudice' can still be submitted to the court (ie here to show that a 'Letter Before Action' was sent) but the offer within it would be ignored by the court.

I think!

no need for without prejudice for this. Basically as no interest is yet due, it is not something the claimant can bargain with.


a without prejudice letter should only be used if you are willing to settle for less than your claim amount.


If you want you to use interest as bargaining chip, then you should lump it in your letter before action letter where you point out the consequences of the defendant losing. Along with court fees, etc

Zorz_2

Update:

Eventually I've sent a letter before action to both the former landlord and the agent. I threatened with court action not only to get the deposit back but also about the non protection.

The agent blinked first (or the LL got in touch with them) and refunded my deposit within a few days of sending the letter! :beer:

Of course, being the nasty piece of work that he is, he said in his reply that I am "in denial" about my deposit's protection. :rotfl: I'm thinking now of getting in touch with one of those "no win, no fee" solicitors firms.:cool:

harrys_dad

Why do you need a solicitor, you can just apply to the court yourself within 6 years of leaving.

G_M

Thanks for the update Zorz, though I still don't understand why you sent it to the old LL rather than the new one. But important thing is you got the result!

Thanks also to all who corrected me on the 'without prejudice' wording.

Zorz_2

harrys_dad wrote: »

Why do you need a solicitor, you can just apply to the court yourself within 6 years of leaving.

Apparently, the Civil Procedure in England is that cases for non protection of tenancy deposits cannot be heard in the Small Claims Track but have to go through Multi Track. This is significantly more procedural, expensive (over £1000 in court fees) and long winded.

G_M wrote: »

Thanks for the update Zorz, though I still don't understand why you sent it to the old LL rather than the new one.

I didn't send it to the first landlord! Oh, I think I know why you got confused. This tenancy has ended (with the eventful manner I describe in another thread) a long time ago. I no longer live there. That's why I wrote "former landlord", though I realise now that it could be misunderstood.