Previous LL has moved...deposit in dispute

martindow

Pixie5740 wrote: »

They could refuse to sign for recorded delivery and so notice would not be served.

Also a proportion of recorded delivery is actually delivered without a signature being obtained. Quite often the website does not update to show delivery. Always best to save the extra cost and get the CoP from the PO which courts deem delivered after two working days.

FurAndFins

Look LL up on 192(dot)com - he might have a free listing. You can pay £6 for info if he's listed but not fully disclosed.

Go to the Council to inspect the Electoral Roll if you know the area he lives in.

Punch in his name or number on Google - you'll amazed what comes up. (All I have to do is punch in my phone number on Google and I learn more about myself than I already know about myself - scary).

Can you ask the new tenant where their LL lives, as you want to ask LL's permission to <insert random excuse here>?

Good luck!

Delta_1984

mrginge wrote: »

Inform the LA that you are starting legal action against both them and the LL as joint defendants.
Advise the LA that they are being included due to their refusal to provide the LLs details.
Send a letter before action to the LA and the LL at the address you currently have.

They will likely buckle to avoid the hassle.

This worked! Thank you very much for the advice

RAS

Glad it all panned out for you.

[Deleted User]

Bit confused here, the deposit is held by DPS, but the LL rejected the claim and would not enter into ADR. DPS said there was nothing they could do and OP would have to take the case to SCC.

OP advised to send a letter before action to LL,

BUT DPS still holds the deposit, so how would court action be effective against the LL.

agrinnall

treetops wrote: »

Bit confused here, the deposit is held by DPS, but the LL rejected the claim and would not enter into ADR. DPS said there was nothing they could do and OP would have to take the case to SCC.

OP advised to send a letter before action to LL,

BUT DPS still holds the deposit, so how would court action be effective against the LL.

Well, unless the OP comes back to say exactly what happened we won't know for sure. But one possibility is that the LA and/or the LL simply paid the amount of the deposit directly to the OP out of their own funds.

[Deleted User]

I hope the OP comes back to clarify, but if the DPS did hold the deposit, then surely the advice given to take the LL to SCC was theoretically incorrect. Only asking because I may be in a similar situation soon when a LL refuses ADR.

Who ever said that rent deposit schemes were supposed to make things easier for tenants!!

benjus

I can't see anything in the thread that says the deposit was held by DPS. In my experience landlords using letting agents are more likely to use insurance-backed than custodial schemes for deposit protection, with the deposit money held by the letting agent.

agrinnall

benjus wrote: »

I can't see anything in the thread that says the deposit was held by DPS. In my experience landlords using letting agents are more likely to use insurance-backed than custodial schemes for deposit protection, with the deposit money held by the letting agent.

Look harder .

Delta_1984 wrote: »

Hi All,

I offered to go to ADR (DPS) but it was refused,

bouicca21

Treetops, The deposit schemes offer ADR, but it is not compulsory so the LL has the opportunity to accept or refuse. A refusal means the only recourse is to the courts - or the threat of court action.