Landlord Keeping my Deposit (Lodger)

goblingoblingoblin

Hi, sorry this is long!
I was living in a house with a license to occupy. I didn't live with my landlord, but their child was living in the house. Around May/June the child moved out. A different child (older) moved in while they are inbetween renting flats a week before I moved out in late July. I lived with two other lodgers. My landlord doesn't live in the country, and we were never given their direct contact information. We can only contact the landlord through their children, even when we asked for for it, they insisted we go through them. Our rent is paid directly to our landlord.

I paid a deposit of around £1k. During my stay I always reported when I found things broken, and I left the room clean when I moved out. I'll admit there were some small scratches on the table/desk from my lamp, and the fabric of the mattress had split at the seams in a section.

I was initally told by the older child the day I moved out that once they check the room I'd get my deposit back. Two weeks later I hadn't heard anything, so I chased them up on it. They said they were going to do a full check of the house in mid-September, when all the other lodgers had moved out. I pointed out in my contract it stated that I was meant to receive my deposit upon vacation of the room, not a month and a half later. The other lodgers had told me that the older child had moved into my old room. I didn't want to be found responsible for damages that may occur between this time.

I then get a response that I wouldn't be receiving any of my £1k deposit back, because of the damage I was aware of (£500, and also said they'd have to get a new bedframe but didn't say anything was wrong with the bedframe), but also because the dishwasher was missing parts (they told me it would cost £750 to repair) and to replace all the flooring downstairs in the kitchen/livingroom (£4k to replace) because of some small sections where fake wood had caught and peeled off. If they had told me they were keeping about £200 I wouldn't contest it, but to keep £1k seems really unreasonable.

I sent the messages to the other lodgers still living in the house, and obviously they knew nothing about going to be charged by the family for the dishwasher/floor, and that they probably wouldn't get any of their deposit back too. We're going to contact Citizens Advice and are looking into the steps to make a small claim. I just need some confirmation that this is crazy right? We have some legs to stand on? We only ever walked on the floor and rarely even used the dishwasher! We haven't had to go through this process before, so any advice/thoughts would be great. Regretably I completely forgot to take pictures of my room when I moved out, but is there any other evidence we can gather in the meantime? Like I said, the other lodgers will be in the house until mid-Sept. Thanks!

Alderbank

goblingoblingoblin said:

Hi, sorry this is long!
I was living in a house with a license to occupy. I didn't live with my landlord, but their child was living in the house. Around May/June the child moved out. A different child (older) moved in while they are inbetween renting flats a week before I moved out in late July. I lived with two other lodgers. My landlord doesn't live in the country, and we were never given their direct contact information. We can only contact the landlord through their children, even when we asked for for it, they insisted we go through them. Our rent is paid directly to our landlord.

I paid a deposit of around £1k. During my stay I always reported when I found things broken, and I left the room clean when I moved out. I'll admit there were some small scratches on the table/desk from my lamp, and the fabric of the mattress had split at the seams in a section.

I was initally told by the older child the day I moved out that once they check the room I'd get my deposit back. Two weeks later I hadn't heard anything, so I chased them up on it. They said they were going to do a full check of the house in mid-September, when all the other lodgers had moved out. I pointed out in my contract it stated that I was meant to receive my deposit upon vacation of the room, not a month and a half later. The other lodgers had told me that the older child had moved into my old room. I didn't want to be found responsible for damages that may occur between this time.

I then get a response that I wouldn't be receiving any of my £1k deposit back, because of the damage I was aware of (£500, and also said they'd have to get a new bedframe but didn't say anything was wrong with the bedframe), but also because the dishwasher was missing parts (they told me it would cost £750 to repair) and to replace all the flooring downstairs in the kitchen/livingroom (£4k to replace) because of some small sections where fake wood had caught and peeled off. If they had told me they were keeping about £200 I wouldn't contest it, but to keep £1k seems really unreasonable.

I sent the messages to the other lodgers still living in the house, and obviously they knew nothing about going to be charged by the family for the dishwasher/floor, and that they probably wouldn't get any of their deposit back too. We're going to contact Citizens Advice and are looking into the steps to make a small claim. I just need some confirmation that this is crazy right? We have some legs to stand on? We only ever walked on the floor and rarely even used the dishwasher! We haven't had to go through this process before, so any advice/thoughts would be great. Regretably I completely forgot to take pictures of my room when I moved out, but is there any other evidence we can gather in the meantime? Like I said, the other lodgers will be in the house until mid-Sept. Thanks!

Welcome to the forum.

You say 'My landlord doesn't live in the country...'

Which country is that, and which country is the house in?

Bookworm105

your situation is an utter legal mess. No way were you a "lodger" with a non resident LL living overseas to whom you paid the rent, (had you paid the children that would be different as they were resident and could have been your landlord).

so what next?
if a lodger, the deposit did not need to be protected,  and, more importantly the (titular) LL is outside the UK in which case you initiating small claims court action is highly problematic and subject to the court accepting your case to start with. You have to prove you can serve notice on the defendant, so if the only address you have is overseas that becomes an international court case. 

alternative?
go at the "landlord" for everything you can think of
- breach of tenancy law: it is was not a "licence"
- failure to provide UK contact address / agent 
- how many other "lodgers"? Can you go after him for breach of HMO rules ?

(but avoid any suggestion of LL failing to pay UK tax as that can rebound on the tenants for failing to deduct tax owed under the "non resident landlord" tax rules)

I suspect the bottom line is you have learned a very sharp lesson and going legal may cost you a lot more than £1,000
Get professional advice on your options, and be realistic about them (solicitors will frequently advise on the merits of a case without charging you)

goblingoblingoblin

Alderbank said: 

Welcome to the forum.

You say 'My landlord doesn't live in the country...'

Which country is that, and which country is the house in?

Thank you! My landlord lives in Lebanon. The house I was renting was in the UK. 

Bookworm105 said:

your situation is an utter legal mess. No way were you a "lodger" with a non resident LL living overseas to whom you paid the rent, (had you paid the children that would be different as they were resident and could have been your landlord).

so what next?
if a lodger, the deposit did not need to be protected,  and, more importantly the (titular) LL is outside the UK in which case you initiating small claims court action is highly problematic and subject to the court accepting your case to start with. You have to prove you can serve notice on the defendant, so if the only address you have is overseas that becomes an international court case. 

alternative?
go at the "landlord" for everything you can think of
- breach of tenancy law: it is was not a "licence"
- failure to provide UK contact address / agent 
- how many other "lodgers"? Can you go after him for breach of HMO rules ?

(but avoid any suggestion of LL failing to pay UK tax as that can rebound on the tenants for failing to deduct tax owed under the "non resident landlord" tax rules)

I suspect the bottom line is you have learned a very sharp lesson and going legal may cost you a lot more than £1,000
Get professional advice on your options, and be realistic about them (solicitors will frequently advise on the merits of a case without charging you)

Thanks so much for your reply. It really is such a mess. I think the family is pretty smart on the whole lodger v. tenant situation and operate with loopholes, one of the children vaguely mentioned having their own contract with their parents which may technicially have them as a 'property manager', but again they're incredibly defensive and vague when asked about it. I've tried wrapping my head around the whole tenant v. lodger things for a while, which feels like a grey area with this family. If one of the children are a 'property manager', would I be able to serve them the small claims on the landlord's behalf? 

And yes! The sharpest lesson! Unfortunately I was really desperate for a place when I rented it, as were the other two lodgers. I definitely won't be making this mistake again! But thank you so much for the reply, it was really insightful.

theartfullodger

In that case you had an AST which required deposit protection.  But sadly with the mess they Lebanon is in I fear no chance of getting money out of him. (You can ask him...)

Bookworm105

gob

Thanks so much for your reply. It really is such a mess. I think the family is pretty smart on the whole lodger v. tenant situation and operate with loopholes, one of the children vaguely mentioned having their own contract with their parents which may technicially have them as a 'property manager', but again they're incredibly defensive and vague when asked about it. I've tried wrapping my head around the whole tenant v. lodger things for a while, which feels like a grey area with this family. If one of the children are a 'property manager', would I be able to serve them the small claims on the landlord's behalf? 

And yes! The sharpest lesson! Unfortunately I was really desperate for a place when I rented it, as were the other two lodgers. I definitely won't be making this mistake again! But thank you so much for the reply, it was really insightful.

there is no "technicality"
either the child is your landlord and the paperwork says so (u = lodger) or it doesn't and he isn't (u = AST tenant) "Property manager" does not itself mean landlord and given who and where you pay that is bald fact.

in respect of you being a tenant, not a lodger. The law in that case in respect of an overseas LL requires they have an "agent" based in the UK through which the tenant can contact the LL without having to send messages overseas. In that case a "property manager" may have meaning

How many occupants were there in the property? 
(You have already said you were lodger so there is no question of you being a "joint" group)
Does the property have 3 (or more) floor levels?

I think you going legal would be a waste of money, but depending on the above you could "get revenge" (or leverage your deposit back through threats ?) by checking your local council's rules regarding licensing of HMO

if 3 or more, that is a mandatory HMO and failure to obtain council licence has significant financial repercussions. If < 3, then it depends if the council has what is called "selective licencing" in place. Either way if an HMO then it will cost them a lot of money if the building does not meet certain standards


there are other threats you could use because I'll take as read that "the family" has not followed the correct procedure for letting to tenants (which is what you are) so you should report "them" anyway

goblingoblingoblin

I just had another look at my contract and it does say that any notices to the owners can be sent to the house I was renting, and should be deemed received after 24 hours. Would this be acceptable to small claims?

Bookworm105

goblingoblingoblin said:

I just had another look at my contract and it does say that any notices to the owners can be sent to the house I was renting, and should be deemed received after 24 hours. Would this be acceptable to small claims?

you need to ask the court
at the end of the day the Lebanese person is outside UK jurisdiction and winning in court is one thing, but enforcing the judgement (ie physically getting the money) is totally separate.
UK bailiffs are not going to go to Lebanon and I doubt they would get very far finding & seizing assets in the UK owned by him to sell off.

doodling

Hi,

Bookworm105 said:

goblingoblingoblin said:

I just had another look at my contract and it does say that any notices to the owners can be sent to the house I was renting, and should be deemed received after 24 hours. Would this be acceptable to small claims?

you need to ask the court
at the end of the day the Lebanese person is outside UK jurisdiction and winning in court is one thing, but enforcing the judgement (ie physically getting the money) is totally separate.
UK bailiffs are not going to go to Lebanon and I doubt they would get very far finding & seizing assets in the UK owned by him to sell off.

Well, there is one asset that the OP is aware of (assuming that the landlord owns it)...

Of course, the OP would have to go to the trouble of winning a court claim and getting a charge placed on the property and they would only get their money back when it was eventually sold, and a court is (probably) not going to permit the OP to force a sale.

Unless the OP has further money they are willing to throw away then it probably isn't worth going legal.

_Penny_Dreadful

I don’t agree with @Bookworm105 or @theartfullodger that this was an AST.  It still counts as having a resident landlord if a member of the landlord’s family shares accommodation with the person he or she is letting to. In this case the landlord’s sons were sharing accommodation with @goblingoblingoblin so I think goblingoblingoblin was an excluded occupier and not a tenant with an AST. 

The first step of getting the deposit returned is to send a letter before action to the landlord requesting your full deposit back within 14 days. If/when the landlord doesn’t return your deposit you need to file a Money Claim Online to go to small claims court. Winning a judgement is easy but enforcing a judgement is another thing entirely. 

Bookworm105

_Penny_Dreadful said:

I don’t agree with @Bookworm105 or @theartfullodger that this was an AST.  It still counts as having a resident landlord if a member of the landlord’s family shares accommodation with the person he or she is letting to. en

that is not how I read it, the child moved out and was replaced with a different child and the (titular) LL was never resident at all
Shelter Legal England - Excluded occupiers - Shelter England

For the occupier to be excluded it is necessary that the:

landlord's family member must have occupied the same premises of which the whole or part of the shared accommodation with the occupier forms part, and have occupied the premises as their only or principal home both at the outset of the occupancy agreement and at the time it comes to an end, and

landlord must live in the same premises of which the whole or part of the shared accommodation between their family member and the occupier forms part, and have occupied the premises as their only or principal home both at the outset of the occupancy agreement and at the time it comes to an end

On balance it would be worth the OP contacting Shelter and get them to make a judgement on whether it is a "sham" lodger agreement. I still think it is.