Charge for returning overpaid rent?

jonnygee2

Depends if tenancy agreement covers it,...

See Shelter Legal here...
http://england.shelter.org.uk/legal/rents/introduction_to_rents/payment_of_rent#1

In this case, this isn't legally owed rent of any kind, it's just a mistaken bank transfer.

It's well established that keeping an accidental bank transfer is a form of theft e.g. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/10/man-jailed-theft-766k-accidentally-transferred-bank-account/

G_M

theartfullodger wrote: »

Depends if tenancy agreement covers it,...

See Shelter Legal here...
http://england.shelter.org.uk/legal/rents/introduction_to_rents/payment_of_rent#1
"4" is Marks and Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd & Anor [2015] UKSC 72; Ellis v Rowbotham [1900] 1 QB 740, CA.

see...
https://swarb.co.uk/ellis-v-rowbotham-ca-1900/

However, any decent landlord/agent should refund in full. But being decent is not a requirement for a landlord: Or agent: Or tenant..... (? unless tenancy agreement says so?? )

Yes I agree 100% with that reference (and knew of that already).

But that's not how I read the situation here though. In those cases, rent was paid as due for a period of the tenancy, which then ended part-way through that period. No refund was due for the part of the period following the end of the tenancy.

In this case, I understood the OP to have mistakenly made an additional payment for an entire period (month?) after the end of the tenancy (forgot to cancel standing order).

Incidentally statute law has also now amended the case law you quote, in circumstances where a S21 has been served.


Deregulation Act 2015

40 Repayment of rent where tenancy ends before end of a period

After section 21B of the Housing Act 1988 insert—
“21CRepayment of rent where tenancy ends before end of a period

(1)A tenant under an assured shorthold tenancy of a dwelling-house in England is entitled to a repayment of rent from the landlord where—

(a)as a result of the service of a notice under section 21 the tenancy is brought to an end before the end of a period of the tenancy,

(b)the tenant has paid rent in advance for that period, and

(c)the tenant was not in occupation of the dwelling-house for one or more whole days of that period.

(2)The amount of repayment to which a tenant is entitled under subsection (1) is to be calculated in accordance with the following formula—

where—

R is the rent paid for the final period;

D is the number of whole days of the final period for which the tenant was not in occupation of the dwelling-house; and

P is the number of whole days in that period.

(3)If the repayment of rent described in subsections (1) and (2) has not been made when the court makes an order for possession under section 21, the court must order the landlord to repay the amount of rent to which the tenant is entitled.

(4)Nothing in this section affects any other right of the tenant to a repayment of rent from the landlord.”

davidmcn

jonnygee2 wrote: »

It's well established that keeping an accidental bank transfer is a form of theft e.g. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/10/man-jailed-theft-766k-accidentally-transferred-bank-account/

If it's £766k and there's no previous relationship between the parties then perhaps you might get the police interested, but I don't think it's a useful tactic in the OP's situation. Even if the cops treat it as a crime, it doesn't mean you'll get your money back any time soon.

Lucky_Duck_2

G_M wrote: »

In this case, I understood the OP to have mistakenly made an additional payment for an entire period (month?) after the end of the tenancy (forgot to cancel standing order

This was how it was explained to me, I guess this must be a sufficiently common occurrence for the author of the tenancy agreement to write a clause seeking to make a charge for it's return.

Lucky_Duck_2

G_M wrote: »

Proof of the LL's contractors causing the chips?
Did the tenant report the damage done by the contractors, at the time, in writing, to the landlord?

I did ask those questions!

On the 'check out fee', my view was that the landlord would have to evidence the costs reasonably incurred.

Comms69

Lucky_Duck wrote: »

This was how it was explained to me, I guess this must be a sufficiently common occurrence for the author of the tenancy agreement to write a clause seeking to make a charge for it's return.

I suspect so. Not sure how people budget these days, given it's the biggest 1 off payment every month; you'd think they'd notice...

Lucky_Duck wrote: »

I did ask those questions!

On the 'check out fee', my view was that the landlord would have to evidence the costs reasonably incurred.

The LL doesn't have to incur any costs. But any loss must be reasonably calculated yes.


The LL doesn't need to fix anything.

Lucky_Duck_2

I'd like to think that I would cancel the standing order rather than letting it run but we all do make mistakes from time to time!

To paraphrase the agreement on the 'check out' - the tenant pays the landlords costs - so if there aren't any then nothing would be payable.

Comms69

Lucky_Duck wrote: »

I'd like to think that I would cancel the standing order rather than letting it run but we all do make mistakes from time to time!

To paraphrase the agreement on the 'check out' - the tenant pays the landlords costs - so if there aren't any then nothing would be payable.

just to be clear - do you mean the check out fee or claims of damage?


The check-out fee should be stated as a figure. If it is not, than yes it would be a 'reasonable' amount. - ultimately for a court to decide.


If it's for damage then there is no obligation to repair anything.


Unless you can quote the agreement in full, it's not possible to advise what can and cannot be claimed

Lucky_Duck_2

I was talking about check out fee, so I believe we are in agreement.

However the point of my OP was that rather than just returning the overpaid rent the landlord intended to charge a fee for doing so!

Comms69

Lucky_Duck wrote: »

I was talking about check out fee, so I believe we are in agreement.

However the point of my OP was that rather than just returning the overpaid rent the landlord intended to charge a fee for doing so!

Which they agreed to in their tenancy agreement.