renting and deposits

diane***

the future


courts, police, lawyers, courts ...........stress , mental health ,months of upset .


they are working hard paying up student loans earning money only to pay for the drugged up violent abusive drunk and his selfishness.


wouldn't you have a violent thought as a helpless parent? this will cost in hundreds........ but the law supports the drunk drugged up violent thief ............


the police cautioned him..... he was told he isn't allowed to upset others ..... well that would have had an impact i'm sure........... what else could they do in reality?


only time will sort this out and that time will cost the innocent , the criminal will walk away with help from every social service out there, the working kids trying to get on will be left hundreds of pound down and unsupported .

Pixie5740

If I were one of the tenants who had moved out I would just stop paying the rent. 1) The remaining tenant isn't passing it on to the landlord anyway. 2) If the rent was paid direct to the landlord the landlord isn't going to do anything whilst he continues to get the money.

Sure, this course of action may eventually end up in small claims court but it's probably heading that way anyway so I would force the landlord's hand.

diane***

I hope you are right weslyad,


it would be fair to return the deposits of the others who have all moved promptly and done as asked but it's money and can you see a greedy landlord not taking .


pixie, i think you are right, not paying for a place you have been asked to leave would seem reasonable, it seems the law is about that contract.
citizens advice will send them on the right track i hope.


the landlord is free to get other tenants in the empty rooms now.

Comms69

diane*** wrote: »

the future


courts, police, lawyers, courts ...........stress , mental health ,months of upset . - Not necessarily, are the police taking action? If not then no need for any of that


they are working hard paying up student loans earning money only to pay for the drugged up violent abusive drunk and his selfishness.


wouldn't you have a violent thought as a helpless parent? this will cost in hundreds........ but the law supports the drunk drugged up violent thief ............ - no the law supports the Landlord and the tenant. they can all take the drugged up tenant to court for his share, but blood out of a stone comes to mind


the police cautioned him..... cautioned or warned? he was told he isn't allowed to upset others ..... well that would have had an impact i'm sure........... what else could they do in reality? - well they either pass the file onto prosecution or take No Further Action


only time will sort this out and that time will cost the innocent , the criminal will walk away with help from every social service out there, the working kids trying to get on will be left hundreds of pound down and unsupported .

They could get him a CCJ - that will mess up his life for 6 years

saajan_12

diane*** wrote: »

it would be fair to return the deposits of the others who have all moved promptly and done as asked but it's money and can you see a greedy landlord not taking .

No it wouldn't, the tenants are one unit. If they haven't ALL vacated, then the LL cannot relet the property, and thus collect full rent from new tenants, hence the current tenants SHOULD be liable for the full rent. This LL should deduct this from the deposit sue for the rest in court.

Just as it isn't sufficient to move your self out without moving your property out, it also isnt' sufficient to move one person out but leave another cotenant in the property. Your son agreed to be responsible for his cotenants.

Not sure why you want to go to CAB, they won't say any differently than the unanimous answer you've gotten here, but feel free if it reassures you. But OP, stop moaning about the unfairness of the contract your son signed, and get on with advising him to encourage the co tenant to move out, or make use of his room some other way. He shouldn't have committed himself to another tenancy while still on the hook for this one if he couldn't afford both.

pramsay13

It's an interesting situation.
It's not unusual for a landlord to offer a house to rent where all tenants are individually liable, although in my experience it would be a group of friends looking to rent together.
The law is very much on the side of the tenants, and if they had decided as a group to dig their heels in and not move out they would have been able to stay there just paying one set of rent until evicted.
Unfortunately they are obviously a separate group and have acted independently with most moving out and one deciding to stay.
Assuming they can't persuade the individual tenant to leave the landlord will probably start eviction proceedings. He will almost certainly apply to use the deposit to cover any rent outstanding and then look to recoup any outstanding balance from one or more of the tenants.
There would be nothing stopping the other tenants issuing proceedings against the one tenant if they lose our due to his actions, although not sure how realistic that would be.

Soundgirlrocks

diane*** wrote: »

my son rented with 6 others ...strangers at first.
the landlord made them jointly responsible for the house with regards their deposit.
Some renter went some new came over the 2 years, my son was lead tenant.
one renter lost his job, took to drug/drink and theft from other tenants, noise parties all hours.
complaints to the landlord were made.
the landlord could do nothing as long as he paid his rent.
it deteriorated
The landlord said he would not be renewing the tenancy to all in February.

Was the difficult tenant on the original tenancy? If not did your son sign a new tenancy with this individual on it? It sounds to me like the landlord as got into a mess issuing one tenancy at the beginning and then as the tenants changed issuing new ones without actually terminating the first. Each tenant should have had their own tenancy

Also sounds like the house was a HMO, was the landlord compliant with the relevant regulations? (there are variations depending on the council) Was your sons deposit protected?

All in its a mess, if I were your son I would stop paying the landlord sound a bit clueless, I very much doubt he would be able to provide the relevant evidence should he try and take your son to court.

Neil_Br

I know the landlord can't throw him out and change the locks, but what if the other tenants did ?

Comms69

Neil_Br wrote: »

I know the landlord can't throw him out and change the locks, but what if the other tenants did ?

They would be guilty of assault and illegal eviction?

Smodlet

Sorry, diane***, but whining,"It's not fair, it's harsh" etc. is utterly pointless, as has been illustrated ad infinitum already. Your son signed a contract. The whole point of contracts is to be legally binding. If you don't like what's in a contract, don't sign it and walk away.

If you make a mistake like this, the only positive you can really take out of it is to learn from it. Your son had the choice to rent somewhere else where he had an individual, rather than a shared, tenancy. We can all be clever with hindsight.

Seems to me the only control you have over this situation is how much you allow it to stress you out. You can choose to deal and move on or wallow in it and prolong the pain: The end result will be exactly the same but for the toll it has taken on you. I speak from experience.