Do private tenants have any rights

bigfreddiel

Actually G_M is wrong!

Tenants can claim up to three times their deposit if money is not lodged in an approved scheme. It's all on the .gov web, a simple search found it. To save you all the effort of googling here is the appropriate section:

Your landlord faces penalties if they don't protect your tenancy deposit as required by tenancy deposit protection rules.

Your landlord will have to pay you compensation of between 1 and 3 times the amount of your deposit.

Tenancy deposit breaches can make a section 21 notice invalid.

Your landlord may:

be unable to get a court order to evict you using the section 21 notice procedure
have to refund your deposit in full before they can use a section 21 notice


Cheers fj

Guest101

Mr.Generous wrote: »

dont change the locks, landlord could use that as a valid reason to try and evict. Let him break the law but dont breach the tenancy, you'll be in a stronger position. Save all messages, communicate by email If I were you and ask about gas safety in every communication. I'd also ask about deposit protection scheme, I had to notify tenant of scheme name and membership number so they could check if they wanted to.

This is some of the worst advice I've read on here in a long time - I'd suggest you do some research

Pixie5740

bigfreddiel wrote: »

Actually G_M is wrong!

Tenants can claim up to three times their deposit if money is not lodged in an approved scheme. It's all on the .gov web, a simple search found it. To save you all the effort of googling here is the appropriate section:

Your landlord faces penalties if they don't protect your tenancy deposit as required by tenancy deposit protection rules.

Your landlord will have to pay you compensation of between 1 and 3 times the amount of your deposit.

Tenancy deposit breaches can make a section 21 notice invalid.

Your landlord may:

be unable to get a court order to evict you using the section 21 notice procedure
have to refund your deposit in full before they can use a section 21 notice


Cheers fj

In what way was G_M wrong? You were the one who posted duff information. G_M's guides that I linked to state that compensation (penalty, whatever you want to call it) of 1-3 times the value of the deposit can be claimed if the deposit isn't registered with a scheme or is registered late. Those same guides also state that not protecting a deposit means any Section 21 would be invalid unless the landlord returned the deposit before serving notice.

Pixie5740

marcarm wrote: »

Using a S21 the LL does not need a reason to evict, they can if they want to. They just have to follow the correct procedure the same as evicting for any other reason.

OP can change the locks if they feel the LL will go in and dump all their stuff outside, given the LLs lack of consideration for his other responsibilities would you really put it past them not to try and evict illegally?

You also don't know if changing the locks WOULD breach the tenancy, unless you have a copy of their agreement in front of you.

Additionally, how would a landlord know the locks had been changed unless they were attempting something like an illegal eviction....

bigfreddiel

Pixie5740 wrote: »

In what way was G_M wrong? You were the one who posted duff information. G_M's guides that I linked to state that compensation (penalty, whatever you want to call it) of 1-3 times the value of the deposit can be claimed if the deposit isn't registered with a scheme or is registered late. Those same guides also state that not protecting a deposit means any Section 21 would be invalid unless the landlord returned the deposit before serving notice.

Sorry G_M, I was wrong on the the number of years the LL has been in breach of the law being used as a multiplier. I would check tho' Paul Shamplina did mention it so I may well be right:)

Miss_Samantha

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Additionally, how would a landlord know the locks had been changed unless they were attempting something like an illegal eviction....

Or he was just using his right of access to carry out his duties to keep the tenant safe and well housed...

bigfreddiel wrote: »

I would check tho' Paul Shamplina did mention it so I may well be right:)

If he said "for every year" then he was very wrong. If he said "for every tenancy" or meant that in the context then he was correct.

Guest101

Miss_Samantha wrote: »

Or he was just using his right of access to carry out his duties to keep the tenant safe and well housed...

Presumebly they therefore gave the required notice and the tenant had time to change the locks?

Naf

Miss_Samantha wrote: »

If he said "for every year" then he was very wrong. If he said "for every tenancy" or meant that in the context then he was correct.

So if the LL renews the AST each year, and each time fails to protect the depost, then you can claim for each AST, not just the active or most recent?

Pixie5740

Miss_Samantha wrote: »

Or he was just using his right of access to carry out his duties to keep the tenant safe and well housed...

Yes, the OP's landlord sounds just like the type of landlord who cares about his duties to keep the OP safe and well housed....;)

G_M

Listening to LBC the other night during the property hour it was said that if your landlord hasn't put your deposit in one of the recognised schemes you can make a claim against him of three times the value of the deposit,[STRIKE] times the number of years it's not been protected.[/STRIKE]
Either you mis-heard, or misunderstood, or LBC go it wrong.

Good grief! Can you not read?

Actually G_M is wrong!

Tenants can claim up to three times their deposit if money is not lodged in an approved scheme.

That is exactly what I said.