It IS a deposit whatever LL says. You could take him to court for not protecting it (1-3 times the deposit, I assume you have a receipt for monies paid?) . It is at least something to give you wiggle room to pressure the LL.
Thanks - I have receipts and this is something I'll pursue after I eventually leave the tenancy, probably later this year. The man owns a LOT of properties but has all the professionalism of a man letting out his late mother's flat while thinking gas safety checks don't apply to him (thankfully there's no gas in the property!)
Don't buy any alcohol to drink in the flat go to the local pub for a drink. If he has any other mental type breakdowns call an ambulance not the police. Mental health problems are dealt with by the NHS just like any other illness.
I'm not really sure why I shouldn't be able to keep a small bottle of wine in the house to make risotto, or even an occasional small glass of single malt whiskey from my late grandfather's supplies (he hasn't found the stuff in my room). If my flatmate was habitually stealing my food would you suggest that I stopped keeping food in the house and ate out for every meal?
I was away on a business trip when he had this mental health crisis, and a third party called the police. I'm not sure as to the identity of the third party (a friend, presumably) or the exact shape the crisis took but as he has depression I suspect it was out of concern for his safety; it's not clear if the third party was there or if they were in another location and trying to stop himself harming himself or what.
Thanks to other posters who have given me a greater understanding of when to call police vs ambulance. I'm not seriously concerned for my personal safety from what little I've seen, but if he was seriously trying to self harm I'm a petite woman and wouldn't have the physical strength to stop him.
The LL does not know about the dog.
The dog has been there c. 9 months and predates me in the flat. He has now belonged to three successive tenants, which is why I say he came with the flat. I will be taking him with me when I leave.
The landlord has never inspected. I have been there since August but the previous housemate was in there since about June 2016 and was never inspected. There was no inventory taken either when I moved in or when the new tenant moved in. Luckily the dog is not a nuisance to neighbours or causing damage to the flat.
Silly landlord! Since this latest tenancy (created when the latest tenant moved in) has no inventory, the LL will have little chance of making any claims for damage/missing items against the current joint tenants.
When I moved in, the LL took the first months rent and last months rent, and hence I will stop paying rent a month before I move out. This is, according to him, not a deposit and hence not in need of protection. Is this correct?
1) Your final rent payment should be two months before the tenancy ends. That rent payment will be advance payment for the penultimate month. The final month's rent has alreay been paid (at the start).
2) I have seen this rent device used by LLs a number of times, but have never heard f it being tested in court. So whether it constitutes a deposit (needing protection) or not is in my view unclear.
a) if it IS rent, then clearly less rent is owed at the end of the tenancy (see my point 1 above), and it does not need to be protected
b) if the LL is expecting rent payments to continue till the final month, as is normal, witth that advance payment being returned to the tenant when he leaves, then clearly it is a deposit and should be protected.
But the LL cannot have itt both ways.
I'd be interested to hear of any court decisions where a tenant had paid 'advance rent' of this type and claimed the penalty for non-protection of a deposit.
1) Your final rent payment should be two months before the tenancy ends. That rent payment will be advance payment for the penultimate month. The final month's rent has alreay been paid (at the start).
Yes, I will do this. The previous housemate was the one doing all the admin of paying the LL etc which I have now taken over. However, he messed up the payments and paid his own last months' rent and then failed to stop the standing order for the next month too,
so last I heard he was trying (and struggling) to get hold of the LL to get 1.5 months rent repaid. I do, however, regard that as his issue as I wasn't responsible for the admin, and I have my own fish to fry.
2) I have seen this rent device used by LLs a number of times, but have never heard f it being tested in court. So whether it constitutes a deposit (needing protection) or not is in my view unclear.
a) if it IS rent, then clearly less rent is owed at the end of the tenancy (see my point 1 above), and it does not need to be protected
b) if the LL is expecting rent payments to continue till the final month, as is normal, witth that advance payment being returned to the tenant when he leaves, then clearly it is a deposit and should be protected.
But the LL cannot have itt both ways.
I'd be interested to hear of any court decisions where a tenant had paid 'advance rent' of this type and claimed the penalty for non-protection of a deposit.
I'm tempted to try it on. Is there anything to lose except the £308 court fee e.g. could I end up having to pay the landlord's costs as well as my own? It makes this clause in the AST rather more relevant, though I'm doubtful as to whether a court would enforce it
The tenant agree to fully indemnify the landlord and pay all costs and expenses, including any legal costs and profession fees incurred, in relation to any matter, proceedings or notice for any breach of the tenancy agreement herein. The tenant shall also pay the landlord or his agent reasonable costs for the tenants failure to adhere to the terms of the tenancy
The closest I've ever come to taking someone to court was when I wrote a letter before action aged 19 for unpaid NMW and they coughed up immediately. However, I doubt this LL would roll over quite so easily.
Thanks - I have receipts and this is something I'll pursue after I eventually leave the tenancy, probably later this year. The man owns a LOT of properties but has all the professionalism of a man letting out his late mother's flat while thinking gas safety checks don't apply to him (thankfully there's no gas in the property!)
I'm not really sure why I shouldn't be able to keep a small bottle of wine in the house to make risotto, or even an occasional small glass of single malt whiskey from my late grandfather's supplies (he hasn't found the stuff in my room). If my flatmate was habitually stealing my food would you suggest that I stopped keeping food in the house and ate out for every meal?
I was away on a business trip when he had this mental health crisis, and a third party called the police. I'm not sure as to the identity of the third party (a friend, presumably) or the exact shape the crisis took but as he has depression I suspect it was out of concern for his safety; it's not clear if the third party was there or if they were in another location and trying to stop himself harming himself or what.
Thanks to other posters who have given me a greater understanding of when to call police vs ambulance. I'm not seriously concerned for my personal safety from what little I've seen, but if he was seriously trying to self harm I'm a petite woman and wouldn't have the physical strength to stop him.
It doesn't really matter which one you call.
The police can section in a public place (or a different section in private property / dwelling) and deliver to place of safety.
I think the paramedics could also bring to hospital under mental capacity act (not sure about that, in "my day" it was "common law"). Or they'd call the police for help i.e. to section. Either way, to you it doesn't matter. Just call either and they'll advise.
The tenant agree to fully indemnify the landlord and pay all costs and expenses, including any legal costs and profession fees incurred, in relation to any matter, proceedings or notice for any breach of the tenancy agreement herein. The tenant shall also pay the landlord or his agent reasonable costs for the tenants failure to adhere to the terms of the tenancy
Pretty standard but meaningless clause.
Even without it, a tenant would be liable for LL's costs if he (tenant) breaches the contract and/or fails to adhere etc etc
Hi OP,
It sounds like your landlord has on a continual basis allowed tenants to chop and change (without charging a large referencing fee or a fee for a new contract?) and allows you to live peacefully without frequent inspections. In which case I wonder why you seem keen to sue them if possible? Perhaps there have been more problems than you mention.
Of course gas inspections should be carried out (but you state you don't have gas). If the landlord tries to deduct damages from what was described as a rental payment then yes of course dispute that as indicating a deposit (which should have been protected) but if you experience no bother in moving out why try to make things difficult for the landlord?
Replies
Thanks - I have receipts and this is something I'll pursue after I eventually leave the tenancy, probably later this year. The man owns a LOT of properties but has all the professionalism of a man letting out his late mother's flat while thinking gas safety checks don't apply to him (thankfully there's no gas in the property!)
I'm not really sure why I shouldn't be able to keep a small bottle of wine in the house to make risotto, or even an occasional small glass of single malt whiskey from my late grandfather's supplies (he hasn't found the stuff in my room). If my flatmate was habitually stealing my food would you suggest that I stopped keeping food in the house and ate out for every meal?
I was away on a business trip when he had this mental health crisis, and a third party called the police. I'm not sure as to the identity of the third party (a friend, presumably) or the exact shape the crisis took but as he has depression I suspect it was out of concern for his safety; it's not clear if the third party was there or if they were in another location and trying to stop himself harming himself or what.
Thanks to other posters who have given me a greater understanding of when to call police vs ambulance. I'm not seriously concerned for my personal safety from what little I've seen, but if he was seriously trying to self harm I'm a petite woman and wouldn't have the physical strength to stop him.
2) I have seen this rent device used by LLs a number of times, but have never heard f it being tested in court. So whether it constitutes a deposit (needing protection) or not is in my view unclear.
a) if it IS rent, then clearly less rent is owed at the end of the tenancy (see my point 1 above), and it does not need to be protected
b) if the LL is expecting rent payments to continue till the final month, as is normal, witth that advance payment being returned to the tenant when he leaves, then clearly it is a deposit and should be protected.
But the LL cannot have itt both ways.
I'd be interested to hear of any court decisions where a tenant had paid 'advance rent' of this type and claimed the penalty for non-protection of a deposit.
I'm tempted to try it on. Is there anything to lose except the £308 court fee e.g. could I end up having to pay the landlord's costs as well as my own? It makes this clause in the AST rather more relevant, though I'm doubtful as to whether a court would enforce it
The closest I've ever come to taking someone to court was when I wrote a letter before action aged 19 for unpaid NMW and they coughed up immediately. However, I doubt this LL would roll over quite so easily.
It doesn't really matter which one you call.
The police can section in a public place (or a different section in private property / dwelling) and deliver to place of safety.
I think the paramedics could also bring to hospital under mental capacity act (not sure about that, in "my day" it was "common law"). Or they'd call the police for help i.e. to section. Either way, to you it doesn't matter. Just call either and they'll advise.
Even without it, a tenant would be liable for LL's costs if he (tenant) breaches the contract and/or fails to adhere etc etc
It sounds like your landlord has on a continual basis allowed tenants to chop and change (without charging a large referencing fee or a fee for a new contract?) and allows you to live peacefully without frequent inspections. In which case I wonder why you seem keen to sue them if possible? Perhaps there have been more problems than you mention.
Of course gas inspections should be carried out (but you state you don't have gas). If the landlord tries to deduct damages from what was described as a rental payment then yes of course dispute that as indicating a deposit (which should have been protected) but if you experience no bother in moving out why try to make things difficult for the landlord?
Tlc