Tenancy deposit deductions

Guest101

Regardless of who has control, responsibility rests with the LL.

Good point about LL1 or 2. I'd say letting agent and ll2, as they are making a claim

Pixie5740

You have a contract with LL2, you used to have a contract with LL1 but you have no contract with the LA. LL2 has a contract with the LA and LL1 had a contract with the LA.

If anyone ends up getting sued over the non-protection of the deposit and/or lack of PI it will be LL1, LL2 or both as ultimately these things are the responsibility of the LL regardless of whether they use a LA or not. It's then up to the LL to take it up with the LA.

What is it that you want to achieve here? If all you want is your £350 deposit back then simply letting the LA know that you know that your deposit hasn't been protected correctly and that PI wasn't issued correctly could be enough to prompt them into action.

G_M

I am coming down on LL2 as well.

* The tenancy agreement clearly states a deposit was payable, and would be transferred
* the LL (agent) is making a claim against the deposit, thus admitting there IS a deposit

Question: have the agent/LL2 made a written claim against the deposit or has it all been verbal?

Either way, the agent has been incompetant/unprofessiona;, and has let down one or other of their clients (LL1 or LL2 or both!).

My advice now:

* as a first step, get a written admission from the agent that they have a deposit for the 2nd tenancy. Depending if they have already mentioned deductions etc, a carefully worded letter, headed "Re Property2", asking when the deposit will be returned.

Assuming they respond, acknowledging a deposit exists for Property 2 (ie saying when it will be returned or what deductions are intended), then

* a letter pointing out the PI was never served at the start of the tenancy, and deposit was never registered, and reminding them of the penalty

(See:

Deposits (Rules on deposit protection)


Prescribed Information (RLA links to various deposit schemes' documentation)

Re-issuing PI (when renewing a tenancy - Superstrike Vs Rodrigues - legal guidance)

G_M

Pixie5740 wrote: »

You have a contract with LL2, you used to have a contract with LL1 but you have no contract with the LA. LL2 has a contract with the LA and LL1 had a contract with the LA.

If anyone ends up getting sued over the non-protection of the deposit and/or lack of PI it will be LL1, LL2 or both as ultimately these things are the responsibility of the LL regardless of whether they use a LA or not. It's then up to the LL to take it up with the LA.

What is it that you want to achieve here? If all you want is your £350 deposit back then simply letting the LA know that you know that your deposit hasn't been protected correctly and that PI wasn't issued correctly could be enough to prompt them into action.

Unless my 'scenario 1' is correct. Because LL1 did correctly protect the deposit......

applesyumyum

I would like the £350 back. I'll email the letting agent tomorrow morning and try to word it as well as I can.

I did receive 'The Deposit Protection Service terms and conditions' 10 pages stapled together along with my tenancy agreement when I signed the first tenancy

applesyumyum

The only reference to deducting some of the deposit is in an email from the letting agent;

Only issues I can for-see are the burn mark on the carpet in the lounge and the damage to the inner door which the landlord has reported.

Letting agent is aware the deposit is on property1 and not property2

Pixie5740

G_M wrote: »

Unless my 'scenario 1' is correct. Because LL1 did correctly protect the deposit......

That's why I used "and/or" and some more "or", I was covering my backside.

I rather liked Scenario 1 until we got some more information from the OP. Now I'm thinking Scenario 2 could be the winner.

It sounds like the LA has messed up and the LLs have let them.

applesyumyum

I've emailed this morning;
What deduction amounts are you wanting to take from the £350 deposit? And when could I expect the rest to be paid?

And the reply I just received;
The landlord wants £150 for the carpet and £75 for the damage to the door (£225) although I can totally appreciate he is entitled to this I propose a total deduction of £125 please advise if you agree to this amount, if so I will advise the landlord to accept it you will then have the balance within 5 working days

(For some reason I don't think the Landlord actually lives in this area and therefore it isn't him who has done the inspection and stated the deductions amounts but the letting agent. The new tenant also moves in tomorrow.)

I've just double checked my tenancy agreement for property2, there is a page on prescribed information but it states property1 not property2. I don't think this will affect anything as it's stating P1 not P2.

applesyumyum

I've composed this email;

The prescribed information was never served for -Property2- and the deposit was never registered with the DPS. I'm aware the penalty for these things not being done correctly is up to 3 times the deposit amount (£1050). I'd like my full deposit of £350 returned through the Deposit Protection Service today 22/01/2015.

Is this okay to send?

Guest101

applesyumyum wrote: »

Is it acceptable to write;


The prescribed information was never served for -Property2- and the deposit was never registered. I'm aware the penalty for this is up to 3 times the deposit amount (£1050). I'd like my full deposit returned via bank transfer through the Deposit Protection Service today 22/01/2015.

(I do not want to wait 5 working days for these people to return my money! Unless that is the usual process of these matters)

Reply with this:

Dear sir / madam / name,

I have examined the paper work and discovered that the deposit was never returned and resubmitted for the property <address>. This means the deposit was not protected for my tenancy at thois address.

I have taken advice on the matter and know that I am entitled to claim my full deposit returned immediately, as well as being entitled to bring a punitive law suit for upto 3x the value of the deposit (£1050) against my Landlord. As he no doubt pays for a fully managed service, he will no doubt bring action against yourselves for any loss he incurs as a result.

Any damage to the property which you have described is ofcourse recoverable via small claims court.

I formally request my deposit is released today from the deposit protection scheme. Which will end that part of this situation.

Any claims and counter claims can then be settled.

Of course failure to act would leave me with no choice but to begin the legal process of recovering my money.

Kind regards

Applesyumyum (real name)