Has anybody been awarded 3x their deposit because of TDS?

merlinthehappypig

speedtwin wrote: »

From the DPS website

b) Fine
Tenants can apply for a court order requiring the landlord to safeguard the deposit and supply the prescribed information about the scheme in which it is held, or to return the deposit to the tenant(s). Where the court believes the landlord has failed to comply with these requirements, or the deposit is not being held in an authorised scheme, the court will order the landlord to either repay the deposit within 14 days, or pay the deposit into a scheme. The court will also fine the landlord three times the deposit amount, payable to the tenant within 14 days.

My view would be, you can not be the tenant if you if you are not living there any more. You are no longer the tenant

I suppose the ex-tenant could still apply for a court order and it would be for the judge to sort out.

I can see why you might infer that from the above, but I'm sure that isn't the case. The 'tenant' is the person with the grievance and this doesn't mean that they still have to be living there. If you think about it logically no tenant is going to be having getting difficulty getting their deposit back if they are still living in the property. Deposits only get returned (or not!) when the tenant leaves.

MissMoneypenny

speedtwin wrote: »

My view would be, you can not be the tenant if you if you are not living there any more. You are no longer the tenant

I suppose the ex-tenant could still apply for a court order and it would be for the judge to sort out.

But it isn't just the tenant who can take a LL to court for failing to put the tenants deposit in one of the schemes (see my previous post). Therefore, it wouldn't matter if the tenant is still the tenant in that property or not, would it? There doesn't seem to be a time barring mentioned on this, which should be the important thing. It just mentions that if the LL fails to lodge the deposit and give the relevant information to the tenant within 14 days then it is to be dealt with in the County Court.

MissMoneypenny

clutton wrote: »

its my understanding that if there is a dispute re the return of the deposit at the end of the tenancy, then if both tenant and landlord agree to use the Scheme Arbitration service, then the dispute can be resolved one way or the other.

HOWEVER, neither party is obliged to agree to use the Arbitration scheme - this means that tenants are still in exactly the same position as they were prior to this 2004 Act - in so far as if a landlord refuses to return a deposit and refuses to engage with arbitration - the tenant then has no choice other than to apply to court. Landlords bodies argued long and hard during Consultation processes prior to 2004 that this was a backward step as far as tenants rights were concerned, but, government took no notice.

I think it is a big step forward for the tenants. A lot of people don't want to go to court and some LLs have been behaving badly for years by seeing the deposit as theirs to keep. This way, the LL can now never get away with it. Tenants who are happy to take a LL to court, can still do so. The courts have more powers anyway.

I assume if a LL tries it on with one of the schemes, he doesn't get a punishment and is just told to return the deposit? In court, a LL will have to pay the court costs and will have a CCJ against him/her (which I know they can clear if they pay up within the time stipulated by the court) but it is a lot of hassle for a bad LL and the CCJ with still be recorded somewhere.

clutton_2

Hi MP - when i wrote ""a backward step as far as tenants rights were concerned," - what i meant was that it was argued that the Arbitration service of the Deposit Schemes should have legal backing and be made compulsory for landlord and tenants to use - rather than to allow slum landlords to further drag it out by court action.

i agree that the Deposit schemes are good and do offer the tenant more protection.

But one deposit i needed to get back where a tenant had absconded took up a huge amount of my time, mainly talking to eejits on the Call Centre who knew naff all about tenancy law - it was only when i insisted on being put forward to the "team" that i got to talk to someone sensible.

MissMoneypenny

clutton wrote: »

Hi MP - when i wrote ""a backward step as far as tenants rights were concerned," - what i meant was that it was argued that the Arbitration service of the Deposit Schemes should have legal backing and be made compulsory for landlord and tenants to use - rather than to allow slum landlords to further drag it out by court action.

Hi clutton. Do you know if the "lets try to keep the deposit" landlords get a financial punishment if they put in false claims to the deposit schemes? If not, there might be more than a few chancers out there, who would soon clog the deposit scheme systems.

As most courts would give theses bad LLs a financial punishment, I would rather use the courts and am very glad to have the choice. It might even be quicker using courts if the DS gets a backlog. We wouldn't like these deposit schemes to end up the CSA now, would we.

RabbitMad

ali82 wrote: »

Hi the interest goes to the administrators for the running of the scheme.

I'm bring my case to court in the new year, my landlords don't believe me about the whole scheme they think they will be able to justify themselves as they are alleging damages but they don't seem to understand that the lack of a protected deposit overrides any deductions for damages as this is the whole point to the T.D.S is to resolve these types of disputes.

I shall keep you all posted, as we are definitely taking it to court. I am submitting a N208 form by the way.

Thanks

Do you have an update for us yet ali?

jon-jo

Hi Ali;

I'm really interested to hear how you faired if you ended up going through with the court thing.

My landlord has indicated he wants his flat back although my fiance is expecting our baby in 4 weeks, and he will not budge even by 1-2 month's. I am seriously thinking of making use of this new law, at least as a bargaining point regarding my deposit and an extra few weeks after baby is born, but concerned the law seems to have never been implemented before (a solicitor friend of mine had never heard of it, and he specilised in tenancy law!!).

have their been any successes yet, anyone?

cheers

jon

carolan78

Does anyone know if you do request info on where the deposit is held (my LL has not mentioned even using the scheme) and I were to take him to court and he then gave two months notice on the property what my rights would be?

I am not happy with a few things first and foremost the speed in which he does repairs and we still do not have a copy of the tennancy agreement (we moved from his property over the road into this one in December) also the hob failed the gas safty (also in December) and it still has not been replaced or repaired!

irnbru_2

carolan78 wrote: »

he then gave two months notice on the property what my rights would be?

Providing you're less than 4 months into the 6 months AST then the minimum term will run.

Tori_Bellatrix

jon-jo wrote: »

Hi Ali;

I'm really interested to hear how you faired if you ended up going through with the court thing.

My landlord has indicated he wants his flat back although my fiance is expecting our baby in 4 weeks, and he will not budge even by 1-2 month's. I am seriously thinking of making use of this new law, at least as a bargaining point regarding my deposit and an extra few weeks after baby is born, but concerned the law seems to have never been implemented before (a solicitor friend of mine had never heard of it, and he specilised in tenancy law!!).

have their been any successes yet, anyone?

cheers


jon

Hmmmm.. A solicitor who specialises in Tenancy Law but doesn't know about the Tenancy Deposit Scheme is not earning his vast hourly rate ..

To be fair, I'm currently using a solicitor in the initial stages of trying to get my deposit back and whilst my solicitor knows about the TDS, I'm his first case in this area ... It is a bit of an unknown quantity right now ...