taking a landlord through small claims court

G_M

I too agree Shelter's template (let alone your additions) is far too long/detailed.

The detail goes in the court claim - not here.

Letter before action:

1) Failure to return my deposit in full

2) Failure to protect my tenancy deposit in accordance with the Housing Act 2004, as amended

I refer to my tenancy at [add address of the property] which started on [add date] and ended on [add date].

I note that only [amount] of my [full amount] deposit has been refunded to me. No reasonable or justifiable explanation has been provided for the deduction of [amount].

I therefore require that the outstanding balance of [amount] be returned to me within 14 days of receiving this letter.

Section 213 of the Housing Act 2004, as amended, required that you protect my deposit with a government-backed scheme, as well as provide me with the scheme's 'Prescribed Information', both within 30 days of the payment of my deposit

You failed to comply with either requirement.

The penalty for failing to comply is up to three times the amount of the deposit paid. However I am open to a reasonable offer to settle this matter outside the courts.

If I do not receive payment of the balance of the deposit, plus an agreed reasonable amount for failing to comply with the Housing Act, I will issue court proceedings without further notice.

I reserve the right to include a claim for interest on the unreturned deposit. I will also be asking for an order to cover my costs.

Sorry but having read Shelter's template, I prefer my own!

Your choice of course....

G_M

D_M_E wrote: »

To RAS and G_M

I posted about HMRC because that is what my cousin was told by a lettings agent - she is moving about 250 miles North for work and renting out her house while she is being sent by her employer to some job or other, I don't know what.

No, I didn't read about what I posted, I heard it from an agent a few days ago, and again this morning from a different agent and both times I kept quiet, maybe the tax laws have changed, I don't know but after we left the agents today, I told her what you had posted and to check what HMRC want

Agents are supposed to know these things and I posted as I thought it could give more ammo to the OP.


With regard to HMRC and tax - if the landlord does not have a tax exemption code from HMRC, or does not show or give the tenant a copy of the exemption, then the tenant should deduct tax from the rent before paying the landlord and pass the deducted tax to HMRC.

If this is not done, then I think HMRC can chase the tenant for the unpaid tax as well as the landlord.

Originally posted by D_M_E


This applies to landlord's living overseas, not UK residents who are supposed to make their tax return to HMRC. Reply by RAS

Ignore this post completely. It only applies if the landlord lives abroad.

I suspect D_M_E read this on another recent thread here where the was an overseas LL. Reply by G_M

So you now understand why/when tenants may have a liability for a landlord's tax, and when they don't?

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/intmanual/INTM370010.htm

RobMolyneux

G_M wrote: »

I too agree Shelter's template (let alone your additions) is far too long/detailed.

The detail goes in the court claim - not here.

Sorry but having read Shelter's template, I prefer my own!

Your choice of course....

I've already issued the letter - which in the end was the shelter template with a very minor addition of details - but thanks for your thoughts on this.

I'll update this post as and when i have anything to add.

thanks all.

RobMolyneux

all,

just seeing the thread here on whether an AST or not, there has been a minor development in my case, where the landlord has now put a laminated a4 sheet up in the kitchen with some 'house rules' all of which are sensible and reasonable (apart from me not being sure if the amount (£) he has put in relation to fair usage of utilities is adequate or not), but which wasnt there during any part of my tenancy.

interestingly, on two or three lines he has used the term "lodgers" which is clearly his attempt to avoid the deposit scheme thing.

having read a few bits, there is no way at all that he can claim we are lodgers and not tenants - and the property meets the definitions of an HMO even if he were to live in the room he says is his - which he didnt stay in even once.

But, i have a question which is likely easy to answer;

if i'm a tenant - which i was - is that automatically an Assured Shorthold Tenancy, or are there other definitions of tenancy?

thanks.

Pixie5740

Yes if you are a tenant in England or Wales then you'll automatically have an AST if your tenancy started after 27th February 1997.

Shelter Tenancy Checker

Just because the landlord is going around hanging signs up calling people lodgers it doesn't mean to say they are lodgers. It sounds like a hooky HMO to me.

See also: 5 main differences between a lodger and a tenant.

RobMolyneux

thanks, those links are both very useful (especially as I'm going to be taking on a lodger myself!)

sammyjammy

Sounds like this guy got more greedy than he was already being, thank goodness someone is going to fight back, I hope the council throw the book at him.

RobMolyneux

sammyjammy wrote: »

Sounds like this guy got more greedy than he was already being, thank goodness someone is going to fight back, I hope the council throw the book at him.

he's hopefully going to find his greed in trying to keep £200 turns into costing him around £8-10k if all of us can claim anything like the 3x compensation, and if he wasnt so greedy i'd have never know i was entitled to that.

I will also be reporting him to the local authority over not registering the HMO, which while it will get me nothing, it could cost him a lot (though i assume the up to £20k stated is for repeat/serial offenders.)

The tax man will hopefully look into him, too.

while this started off as a point of principle and not liking the way he'd dealt with other tenants when they moved out, it is more than that now. It's about not wanting him to get away with it, about wanting him to get his comeuppance, and about wanting any future tenants that (like me) dont know better and enter into an agreement in good faith to get a fair deal and not be ripped off.

What is wrong with being fair, honest and paying what you owe?

thequant

G_M wrote: »

I too agree Shelter's template (let alone your additions) is far too long/detailed.

The detail goes in the court claim - not here.

Sorry but having read Shelter's template, I prefer my own!

Your choice of course....

Agree, its far to long and wieldly for initiating the claims process. But was reluctant to go against shelters advice as I presume it's a tried and tested template.

My guess is it so long is due to it explaining the grounds for the X3 deposit claim. Straight forward debt disputes such as X owes Y and I want it back doesn't take to much explaining in either Lay speak or Legal babble.

However explaining why you are legally owed x3 deposit is not so straight forward.

In an LBA, there is an onus to state not just the amount, but why you are owed the money. So probably more is the probably better than less here.

thequant

RobMolyneux wrote: »

while this started off as a point of principle and not liking the way he'd dealt with other tenants when they moved out, it is more than that now. It's about not wanting him to get away with it, about wanting him to get his comeuppance, and about wanting any future tenants that (like me) dont know better and enter into an agreement in good faith to get a fair deal and not be ripped off.

What is wrong with being fair, honest and paying what you owe?

keep your cool and be clinical about how you take this guy to task. Ultimately people like this, get away with it because people dont know or stand up for their rights.

Reading between the lines, it sounds like you will end up in court with this guy. If you do go down the legal process, then it becomes a game and this guy will use every trick in the book, you need to be calm and play the game back.