Using moneyclaimonline for return of deposit

PuppyTumble

Hi, just after a bit of advice. Our landlord did not protect our deposit and has refused to return it. He has ignored two letters before action. Question is can you use money claim online for non protected deposits? The fee is £70 vs £308 for process described on Shelter website.

G_M

Are you claiming the deposit, or the penalty for non-protection, or both?

See

* Deposits: payment, protection and return

I believe some courts accept small claims track for the penalty, but check. Strictly speaking should be Form N208 ( see guidance Form 208A

saajan_12

PuppyTumble wrote: »

Hi, just after a bit of advice. Our landlord did not protect our deposit and has refused to return it. He has ignored two letters before action. Question is can you use money claim online for non protected deposits? The fee is £70 vs £308 for process described on Shelter website.

Yes to claim the return of the original deposit back.
No to claim the non protection penalty, that must be claimed separately.

Comms69

saajan_12 wrote: »

Yes to claim the return of the original deposit back.
No to claim the non protection penalty, that must be claimed separately.

Technically both can be claimed at the same time, but not through MCOL.

steampowered

The short answer is yes, go ahead and use MCOL to issue your claim.

The longer answer needs you to understand that the court system has two different types of claims. There are called "Part 7" claims and "Part 8" claims.

You issue small Part 7 claims through MCOL. You issue Part 8 claims through completing paper form N208.

A claim for return of the deposit can be pursued as a debt claim OR as a claim for return of the deposit under s214 of the Housing Act 2004.

A claim for an additional penalty of between 1-3 times the deposit can only be set out as a claim under s214 of the Housing Act 2004.

A debt claim should be issued through MCOL which is using the Part 7 procedure. But the technical court rules (https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part56#I) say that a claim under s214 of the Housing Act must be issued using the Part 8 procedure.

There are severe disadvantages to using the Part 8 procedure:

* It is not a small claims track procedure. Which means that you WILL be ordered to pay the landlord's legal costs if you lose the case.
* As it is not a small claims track procedure, there is less leeway given by judges to litigants in person.
* The Part 8 procedure has a number of technical legal requirements which make the process much more complicated. It is not just a matter of filling in the form. For example, alongside the form you are required to serve written evidence (which means a formal witness statement verified by a statement of truth) else you may be disbarred from providing evidence at the hearing. If you are a litigant in person without legal training you will almost certainly slip up here.
* The court fee is much higher. £308 just to issue the claim. I'm not entirely sure how the courts treat small Part 8 claims these days, but as Part 8 claims are usually allocated to the multi-track, you may end up having to pay the multi-track hearing fee of £1,090 as well if the case gets to a hearing.
* The court staff are not familiar with usage of the Part 8 procedure in circumstances like this. There is a good chance the court staff would reject your Part 8 claim form and tell you to use the Part 7 procedure instead (even though Part 8 is 'technically' the correct procedure).

If you are a litigant in person, my strong recommendation is to issue your claim - both for the return of the deposit and the penalty - through MCOL using the Part 7 procedure.

Unlike the Part 8 procedure this will require you to state the fixed amount you are claiming, but you should be able to do that.

Even if that is technically not the correct way to claim the penalty, the MCOL procedure gives you much more leeway for getting the procedure slightly wrong. And it greatly reduces the risk to you if things go pear shaped, i.e. in small claims track it is very rare to be ordered to pay the other party's legal costs.