TDS - letter from tenant

bouicca21

It's not about the statute of limitations it's about the judge's (discretionary) power to strike out actions when he/she considers there has been unnecessary delay and an intent to be vexatious.

silvercar

On what basis are you making this claim? The statute of limitations is 6 years. Waiting a few months is very common.

6 years from the event. So the clock started when the deposit was made not when the tenancy ended.

Sounds to me that the tenants are trying it on, otherwise they would have claimed this before now.

I wouldn't roll over, see what evidence the tenants produce.

fairy_lights

bouicca21 wrote: »

It's not about the statute of limitations it's about the judge's (discretionary) power to strike out actions when he/she considers there has been unnecessary delay and an intent to be vexatious.

Who says there's been an unnecessary delay though? Maybe the tenants have only just discovered that the deposit wasn't protected in time.
"Oh no, they're being vexatious!!" would be a pretty weak defence for OP ignoring his obligations.

Pixie5740

silvercar wrote: »

6 years from the event. So the clock started when the deposit was made not when the tenancy ended.

Sounds to me that the tenants are trying it on, otherwise they would have claimed this before now.

I wouldn't roll over, see what evidence the tenants produce.

That's not correct. In the case of deposits the clock starts ticking once the tenancy ends.

Comms69

silvercar wrote: »

6 years from the event. So the clock started when the deposit was made not when the tenancy ended.

Sounds to me that the tenants are trying it on, otherwise they would have claimed this before now.

I wouldn't roll over, see what evidence the tenants produce.

That's not correct. The 6 years is from the end of the tenancy.


Just like 6 years on other debts is not from when it was taken out, but from when it was last acknowledged.

anselld

landlorduk wrote: »

Please can you advise what I should do? Pay or fight it? How much should I pay them?

Offer 1x deposit in full and final settlement - that is the minimum you might get away with.

And sack your Agent.

theartfullodger

Pixie5740 wrote: »

That's not correct. In the case of deposits the clock starts ticking once the tenancy ends.

Nope (IMHO): Generally the deposit must be protected within 30 (**) days of being paid: Then the 6 years to claim is from that date: If there were any subsequent tenancies (both renewals and arguably going periodic) there could be a claim for each one (!).
See
http://england.shelter.org.uk/legal/housing_options/deposits/statutory_protection_of_deposits/time_limits_for_compliance

** See the Shelter link. Clock starts depending on exactly when tenancy started.

!!!! Update Pixie may be correct (Apologies !) See
http://england.shelter.org.uk/legal/housing_options/deposits/statutory_protection_of_deposits/penalties_for_non-compliance/section_214_claims#2

Limitation of claim

A claim must be brought within six years of the date that a 'cause of action' arises.[6]


This date is likely to be the expiry of the time limit for a landlord/agent to comply with the tenancy deposit protection rules, but it could also be argued that the time limit for a claim starts from the end of the tenancy, since that is the time at which the deposit becomes repayable.


In some circumstances, the six-year limit would be unfair if it dates from the expiry of the 30-day time limit for compliance, since the issue of deposit protection may only come to the tenant's attention when the tenancy ends. Also, a tenant may continue in occupation for longer than six years, knowing that the deposit was not protected, but not wanting to bring a claim in case of a retaliatory eviction.


The question of the correct limitation period has not been tested in the courts.

silvercar

It seems the jury is out on the start date.

The tenants would also need proof of when the deposit was paid and proof of when it was protected. Also be able to convince the judge that they weren't being vexatious

Crashy_Time

silvercar wrote: »

It seems the jury is out on the start date.

The tenants would also need proof of when the deposit was paid and proof of when it was protected. Also be able to convince the judge that they weren't being vexatious

No. the landlord would have to prove when it was protected. The tenants must be very skint. or you really peed them off somehow for this to happen?

Pixie5740

Please explain to me how the tenant's case could be seen as vexatious when the law clearly states that the landlord, or an agent acting on his behalf, must protect the deposit within 30 days of receiving it which the OP failed to do?