Landlord Released Deposit - Now Wants It Back

beckyyc17

So last week our tenancy ended, the check-out report was completed and sent to the landlord. He authorised the release of the deposit and we have now received it back. A week later, he has visited the flat himself and now wants to claim money back on a number of things. Our lettings agent has been in touch to advise the deposit was released due to a "system error" and that we now need to pay some money direct to the landlord. However, I have been in touch with the deposit scheme who have said there wasn't a system error - they were instructed to release the deposit so they have done and that the money is now legally ours. We are just wondering if, in this scenario and if we do not pay, is he within his rights to take us to a small claims court?

Any advice is greatly appreciated.

theartfullodger

Do nothing, don't reply 

moneysavinghero

Anyone can take anyone they like to court. I could (if i knew who you are) take you to court and claim damages because your post wasted 1 minute of my life. Whether i would be succesfull or not is a totally different question.

What is the LL trying to claim money back for? Do you agree with these?

Sounds likes the LL is trying t circumnavigate the deposit protection scheme so i guess he feels he has no leg to stand on with the deductions he is trying to make.

deannagone

Anyone can open a small claims case.., but I doubt he'd be successful after releasing the deposit.  As above.

TBagpuss

Make sure that you keep all of the documents.

I suspect that if he does try to take you to court, he will struggle as there was a check out report done, presumably y someone acting on the landlord's behalf, and on the strength of that he authorised the release of the deposit.
It sounds as though is issue is actually with his agents, who it would appear did not do the check out to the standard he expected. 

I'd be inclined to respond to say that you are happy that the check out report accurately reflected the condition of the property, and that you do not accept that any deductions from the deposit would have be justifiable and that as the deposit was released on his authority, not as a result of any error, you will not be making any payment to him and suggest that he addresses any issued he has regarding the check out report with his agents, as it appears to be a matter entirely between them and him.

pluto261

Tough titty. 

Deposits have to be held in a deposit protection scheme, and any claims the landlord wants to make have to be made via the DPS (because they have mediators who can assess whether a claim is valid if the tenant disputes it). Since the deposit is no longer held in a deposit protection scheme, the landlord has no legal claim to any of it.

Your business transaction is over. At this point he's just a random person asking another random person to give him some money to fix up his house. He could take you to small claims court, but he would be laughed out of it.

Gavin83

I actually think the release of the deposit is largely irrelevant. If you've damaged the house then you're liable to pay and he could certainly take you to court for this. All a deposit is for is so a landlord can avoid this action, it doesn't remove your liability.

However what does back you up is the check-out report. What does the report say? Is he claiming the report is wrong with it missing damage (sounds like it based on what you've said) or has he missed what the report is outlining? If it's the first then his quibble appears to be with the reporting agent, not yourself. If it's the second I think he has a slightly stronger case but you could still argue acceptance.

How much is he asking for? Personally in your shoes I'd tell him you consider the matter resolved and won't be returning any money. I suspect if he took you to court (he probably won't) he'd lose.

saajan_12

beckyyc17 said:

So last week our tenancy ended, the check-out report was completed and sent to the landlord. He authorised the release of the deposit and we have now received it back. A week later, he has visited the flat himself and now wants to claim money back on a number of things. - what are the things? are they legitimate damages, caused during your tenancy? 
Our lettings agent has been in touch to advise the deposit was released due to a "system error" and that we now need to pay some money direct to the landlord. However, I have been in touch with the deposit scheme who have said there wasn't a system error - they were instructed to release the deposit so they have done and that the money is now legally ours. - the mechanics of the deposit is really a red herring. Its only held at the start in case you won't willingly pay for damages at the end of the tenancy. It has no bearing on the liability for damages, so if they don't have the security, they go back to the default position of demanding and then going to court as with any other monies owed. 
We are just wondering if, in this scenario and if we do not pay, is he within his rights to take us to a small claims court? - he always has a right to court. Whether he wins depends on whether the damages are legitimate. 

Any advice is greatly appreciated.

Ignore the deposit - for whatever reason, they no longer hold it so it reverts to the usual position of discussing, demanding and ultimately going to court for damages. 
1. Were there actual damages caused during the tenancy, beyond fair wear & tear, and are the amounts suggested reasonable to remedy the issues? 
2. If yes, you could discuss and agree on an amount to pay, in "full and final settlement". 
3. If not, then push back. The LL would have to prove to a court that the damages were actually there - the clean check out report isnt' conclusive proof as something could have been missed, but it would stand in your favour. 
4. If they do take it to court, that would also incur court fees. You'd argue that the LL returning the deposit prematurely meant the deposit scheme arbitration couldn't be used, so fees are their fault and responsibility. 

Grumpy_chap

beckyyc17 said:

So last week our tenancy ended, the check-out report was completed and sent to the landlord. He authorised the release of the deposit and we have now received it back. A week later, he has visited the flat himself and now wants to claim money back on a number of things. Our lettings agent has been in touch to advise the deposit was released due to a "system error" and that we now need to pay some money direct to the landlord. However, I have been in touch with the deposit scheme who have said there wasn't a system error - they were instructed to release the deposit so they have done and that the money is now legally ours. We are just wondering if, in this scenario and if we do not pay, is he within his rights to take us to a small claims court?

Any advice is greatly appreciated.

You move out and there is a check-out report by the independent company (or the LA) and based on this reported condition, which you accepted, the LL returned the deposit in full.

A week later the LL visited and found some damage.  Anyone could have caused that damage after you vacated.  Not your responsibility if that happened.

If the check-out report was inaccurate (in your favour), the LL could try to claim against the inventory company.

Really, the LL either employs the services of the inventory company and trusts them, or needs to do the check-out in person.  The LL chose the inventory company, so needs to accept the quality of their report.

beckyyc17

Thank you very much for all of your replies. To be honest I don't think there really was any damage to the property, only fair wear and tear which is why I was surprised to hear he wants to now take money back. The flat wasn't exactly in a good state when it was let to us, and the lettings agent actually sent us the WRONG inventory for it initially which caused many problems when we first moved in. You're right, I think he needs to take this up with the lettings agent and not us. They haven't sent over a figure of what they want to claim back on yet so will see what they say.

csgohan4

Ignore any further correspondence, not your problem, the time to dispute was before the release