Tenancy Deposit Protection - misleading info given

lollah

Hi, 

Thank you for this amazing service. Before my question, some useful context

1. As one of the tenants, I signed an AST  contract for 12 months in 2016  which also had a ‘“Prescribed information’ which mentioned ‘Tenancy Deposit Scheme (TDS)’ and gave its contact details.

2. Following the signature, I paid £ 2362 for the deposit and £1575 for the first month rent.

3. Before 30 days, I got an email from another scheme provider DPS (insured) that my deposit had been protected, but landlord did not serve any new ‘Prescribed information’

4. I did not question this at that time, all I knew was ‘deposit had to be protected’. That's all.

Given the context above my questions are:

Given the landlord has not given me correct prescribed information, can it be lawfully argued that it was not protected at all and hence I can get the maximum 3 times the deposit ?

Also worth noting in the email I received from DPS,

1. It only had my name, not wife’s who was also a tenant in the agreement.

2. The amount was wrong it had £ 3262 which may be a typo

When the tenancy expired after 12 months, I received an email from DPS, my protection also had ended. But, the landlord did not renew the contract nor the protection for another 3 months. When he did, he then

1. Backdated the agreement by 3 months.

2. But, when I enquired about the expired deposit protection, after a while he did register, but again no prescribed info was sent to me from him,  again I received email from DPS (insured) saying my deposit was protected, but the tenancy start date was not backdated. This time the amount was corrected to £2362.

Following the expiry of another 12 months,

1. DPS emailed me my protection had ended

2. But, landlord did not renew contract nor the deposit protection as we were discussing with some new terms he wanted to add to the contract

3. He then wanted me out, and at this time (after elapse of more than 3 months), he protected the deposit under TDS (custodial)

4. Again no ‘prescribed info’ was sent despite the change in protection
   

Given all of the above, What is the ‘likely’ sum I may be able to get ?

Thanks for reading

greatcrested

lollah said:

Given the context above my questions are:

Given the landlord has not given me correct prescribed information, can it be lawfully argued that it was not protected at all and hence I can get the maximum 3 times the deposit ? No - the deposit is clearly protected. However you could claim for failure to provide the (correct) PI. Likely to get the minimum penalty - 1x deposit. Or maybe nothing if the judge rules PI was provided.

Also worth noting in the email I received from DPS,

1. It only had my name, not wife’s who was also a tenant in the agreement. Irrelvant
   

2. The amount was wrong it had £ 3262 which may be a typo Have you checked with DPS the amount protected? Either it's a typo and the correct figure was protected, the amount protected exceeded the amount paid - either way your money is protected.
   

When the tenancy expired after 12 months, I received an email from DPS, my protection also had ended. But, the landlord did not renew the contract nor the protection for another 3 months. When he did, he then

1. Backdated the agreement by 3 months. So it was protected
   

2. But, when I enquired about the expired deposit protection, after a while he did register, but again no prescribed info was sent to me from him,  again I received email from DPS (insured) saying my deposit was protected, but the tenancy start date was not backdated. This time the amount was corrected to £2362. As above
   

Following the expiry of another 12 months,

1. DPS emailed me my protection had ended

2. But, landlord did not renew contract nor the deposit protection as we were discussing with some new terms he wanted to add to the contract

3. He then wanted me out, and at this time (after elapse of more than 3 months), he protected the deposit under TDS (custodial) So there was a 3 month gap with the deposit unprotected?
   

4. Again no ‘prescribed info’ was sent despite the change in protection
   

Given all of the above, What is the ‘likely’ sum I may be able to get ?

Thanks for reading

Since there was a 3 month unprotected period, no S21 should be valid unless the deposit is first returned. However judges can sometimes be unpredictable, so might allow it given that the protection was put in place albeit late.

I doubt a claim for the penalty would result in the maximum. That is for the worst cases eg where no protection takes place. In your case, the LL has protected the deposit, though with a gap(s) and poor serving of PI. Judge might award 1 or 2 times the deposit. But that's just a guess- no one can second-guess the judge!

lollah

Thanks, If I interpret the law correctly, if PI is served is invalid, it should be as wrong provider was given at the start of AST, then the deposit was not protected at all according to the law ?

Also, since there are multiple tenancy renewals with the latest went from AST to periodic and then Insured to Custodial and no PI was again served, I can claim 6 times (3 times twice over)?

or am I missing something ?