wont refund rental bond

hughies

I have just arranged to move to a new rented house, downgrading as kids have grown up and flown the nest, I had been in the house for 17 years and paid a £200 bond to the letting agency all those years ago. Since then the letting agency has changed hands, and the new ones told me they dont have my bond and with the other agency not trading anymore they dont think I will get it back, Surely the bonds must be passed on to whoever takes over, and the landlord says he doesnt have it either. Is there anyone I can go to to get my bond back, The landlord says hes happy with the way I have looked after the house and has no problem with me getting it back, but new agents dont want to know.

Comms69

It's not relevant. Your Landlord owes you the bond, regardless of how many agents there are.

CommitedToChange

Write to the letting agent telling them that they must refund your bond in 14 days or you will sue for three times it's worth as it wasn't protected in a deposit scheme.

Follow up with a letter before action if the don't pay up.

Make sure you only communicate in writing.

fairy_lights

CommitedToChange wrote: »

Write to the letting agent telling them that they must refund your bond in 14 days or you will sue for three times it's worth as it wasn't protected in a deposit scheme.

Deposit schemes weren't around 17 years ago though, so unless OP has signed a new tenancy at some point that won't apply.

Mahsroh

CommitedToChange wrote: »

Write to the letting agent telling them that they must refund your bond in 14 days or you will sue for three times it's worth as it wasn't protected in a deposit scheme.

Follow up with a letter before action if the don't pay up.

Make sure you only communicate in writing.

I may be wrong on this, but as the OP moved in 17years ago, I'm not sure this rule would apply? Regardless, Comms69 is spot on, it's irrelevant what's happened to the letting agents in that time. The Landlord is ultimately responsible so he/she owes the £200 (assuming there are no justified deductions of course).

CommitedToChange

I though rules came in that all must now be protected in a scheme even those that started before 2007. I know mine is and i was renting before then.

CommitedToChange

The Deregulation Act 2015 has been introduced to help clarify some of the more detailed requirements around protecting deposits, particularly those taken before 6 April 2007. Here are the main changes which you should be aware of:

• Deposits taken before 6 April 2007, for tenancies which have subsequently moved onto a periodic tenancy on or after this date, now need to be protected in a Tenancy Deposit Protection scheme if the tenancy is still running. If a deposit remains unprotected, the landlord could potentially face a fine.
• For deposits taken before 6 April 2007, where the tenancy became periodic before this date, the landlord is not required to protect the tenant’s deposit. However, the landlord won’t be able to serve a section 21 notice to regain possession of a property unless the deposit is protected.
• If a tenancy is renewed or rolls over on a periodic basis, landlords don’t need to reissue Prescribed Information to a tenant if the deposit remains with the same authorised scheme, and the parties and premises remain the same.
• The legislation has also clarified that the reference to ‘the landlord’ within the Prescribed Information includes those acting on behalf of the landlord, such as letting agents.

Ah - so more complicated than I thought.

parkrunner

Do you have a receipt for the bond?

Mahsroh

CommitedToChange wrote: »

The Deregulation Act 2015 has been introduced to help clarify some of the more detailed requirements around protecting deposits, particularly those taken before 6 April 2007. Here are the main changes which you should be aware of:

• Deposits taken before 6 April 2007, for tenancies which have subsequently moved onto a periodic tenancy on or after this date, now need to be protected in a Tenancy Deposit Protection scheme if the tenancy is still running. If a deposit remains unprotected, the landlord could potentially face a fine.
• For deposits taken before 6 April 2007, where the tenancy became periodic before this date, the landlord is not required to protect the tenant’s deposit. However, the landlord won’t be able to serve a section 21 notice to regain possession of a property unless the deposit is protected.
• If a tenancy is renewed or rolls over on a periodic basis, landlords don’t need to reissue Prescribed Information to a tenant if the deposit remains with the same authorised scheme, and the parties and premises remain the same.
• The legislation has also clarified that the reference to ‘the landlord’ within the Prescribed Information includes those acting on behalf of the landlord, such as letting agents.

Ah - so more complicated than I thought.

I'm glad you posted this, because I was just about to reply with a link and a comment of "it's super easy to google this stuff"! ;-)

CommitedToChange

Mahsroh wrote: »

I'm glad you posted this, because I was just about to reply with a link and a comment of "it's super easy to google this stuff"! ;-)

I like to provide proof where I can to make it easy, esp if someone thinks I've got smoething wrong. I admit I did think it was for all deposits now - I actually fall into the second catagory I think - but my landlord has still protected mine.

Mahsroh

CommitedToChange wrote: »

I like to provide proof where I can to make it easy. I admit I did think it was for all deposits now - I actually fall into the second catagory I think - but my landlord has still protected mine.

Whether the law or not, it would have been good practice when the new law was brought in to protect old deposits anyway, so I suspect a lot did.