LandLord just gave me notice.

TartanSaver

justjohn wrote: »

Could I just clear up something ...deposit protection was set up to protect tenants from rogue landlords. It was never setup to penalise legitimate landlords.

By definition, legitimate landlords will use the deposit protection schemes, and therefore cannot be penalised.

justjohn wrote: »

However it now seems to be used and abused by tenants to gain compo from a non compliant landlord, even if the landlord is legit but just does not reg the deposit.

As above, the landlord is not "legit" if they have not protected the deposit.

justjohn wrote: »

Deposit registration is a con provide no benefit to legit tenant or legit landlord. However yet again it does line someone's pocket somewhere.

My last landlord did not protect the deposit. I paid rent in full and on time every month, looked after the property, and left it in a better condition than when I entered it. He tried to ignore my demands for the deposit back. Fortunately, because of his inability to act within the law, I was able to threaten him with the potential loss of several times the deposit. This prompted him to pay my deposit back in full. No one had to go to court, and no one "profiteered" from the situation.

justjohn wrote: »

This is one of the many reasons a landlord should give tenants nothing more than they are legally entitled to by law.

And in my case, I got no "compo" as you put it, simply what I was entitled to. The "stick" of 3x deposit is necessary to force "non-legit" landlords (as you would put it) simply to return the original deposit in full.

As a "legit" tenant, who has always paid deposits, paid rent on time, and taken steps to look after the properties I live in, I can only say that I have never seen any downside to tenants of deposit protection schemes. As above, what if my previous landlord had gone bankrupt? He owns ~10 properties. How many deposits is he unlawfully sitting on? Frankly, I think the law needs to extend to CRIMINAL liability for bigger landlords (and especially bigger agencies.)

I understand what deposits are for - they are NOT for landlords to make money out of, but to offset legitimate losses caused by poor tenant behaviour. Unfortunately, many landlords think they are an excuse to charge tenants for fair wear and tear, or even just theirs to keep. Try filling your OWN house with the cheapest Ikea furniture and see if it's in immaculate condition after 2-3 years.

To turn your attitude around, what a tenant is "entitled to by law" (in Scotland anyway) is 3x the deposit, on application to Sheriff Court. However, this requires the tenant (already at a financial disadvantage in 99% of cases) to engage a solicitor, is time consuming, and may involve upfront costs the tenant cannot afford. Small Claims Court is only empowered to return the deposit, not a multiple of it.

Missko

Error.
Error.

jjlandlord

TartanSaver wrote: »

And in my case, I got no "compo" as you put it, simply what I was entitled to.

'Entitled'? Ah, at least you're honest enough not to pretend that you are not in just for the money.

People always feel entitled when it's time to receive, interestingly...

Missko

Error
Error.

Missko

Error.
Error.

DaveTheMus

Guest101 wrote: »

I'll change that to 'soon to be a...' Then.

I didn't realise it's ok to ignore the LAW because the situation allows it.

Can you post your name, just so I know never to rent from you, seems only fair.

The OP is entitled to have HER money protected, if the LL is not willing to follow the law, he or she should be penalised.

I certainly will not be a rogue landlord, I know that the deposit should be protected, so it will be.

I'm sure there are many accidental landlords out; letting their mothers house to pay for care home fees or they'd bought at the peak of the market and were unable to sell when they relocated due to a new job.

The law should never be ignored if the situation allows it? I take it that you've broke the speed limit or checked your phone while driving. You've never thrown a census report in the bin and you've always paid your TV license......

mrginge

DaveTheMus wrote: »

The law should never be ignored if the situation allows it? I take it that you've broke the speed limit or checked your phone while driving. You've never thrown a census report in the bin and you've always paid your TV license......

Must remember to use this defense if i ever get caught speeding....

:rotfl:

justjohn

TartanSaver wrote: »

As above, the landlord is not "legit" if they have not protected the deposit.

if the landlord returns the deposit but has not regd it he is still legit in my book.


he may be foolish...does not make him a rogue landlord never mind what the law says,

justjohn

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Councils are supposed to wait until a court ordered eviction but many seem to.



You mean like a protected deposit and correct notice. :rotfl:

Letting property is a business. Tenants are customers and it's wise to keep good tenants (pay the rent on time, don't trash the place, report repairs in a timely fashion but don't contact the LL every time a lightbulb needs changed) happy. Just the same that it's wise for tenants to keep good landlords (repairs things quickly, doesn't wonder into your home whenever they feel like it, complies with the law) happy.

Tenant looks, talks in the wrong way or makes demands serve notice. Far too many bad tenants out there.


BTW Any tenants I have had in the past get cheap rent with no rent increases. never served notice on tenants. And all tenants are carefully chosen...mind you only rented out to 3 people...lol they have all stayed for well over 5 years.


I have never HAD OR NEEDED to rent a property due to me needing the money.


I dare say at some point I will get carped upon

DaveTheMus

mrginge wrote: »

Must remember to use this defense if i ever get caught speeding....

:rotfl:

What defence?

I offered no defense, I was trying to ascertain if Guest101 was a hypocrite or not...