Experience with Deposit Scheme Adjudicator

ShadowMango

I am in dispute with a highly unreasonable landlord regarding return of deposit. Just to give an idea, they are demanding 100% of refurbishment costs - after almost five years of living in the flat. They are now claiming £18k of costs on a tenancy of £3k per month so ist has become serious. 

Landlord refused to use the TDS adjudicator service. My point is that using the adjudicator would have avoided all legal costs. However, landlord argues that the adjudicator cannot make awards of more than the deposit.

In order to make my point, I would need to know what information you get from the adjudicator in case the costs of damages exceed the deposit amount.

Are they just telling you something along the lines of "The sum of damaged attributable to the tenant exceed the deposit", or do they give you an assessment, line by line based on the check-out report, what the reasonable repair cost of the damage is and who is responsible for it (even if the total amount exceeds the deposit)?

It would be absolutely great if someone who has used the adjudicator in a deposit dispute could give me a (redacted) example of exactly what information you get back.

Thank you very much!

Jude57

ShadowMango said:

I am in dispute with a highly unreasonable landlord regarding return of deposit. Just to give an idea, they are demanding 100% of refurbishment costs - after almost five years of living in the flat. They are now claiming £18k of costs on a tenancy of £3k per month so ist has become serious. 

Landlord refused to use the TDS adjudicator service. My point is that using the adjudicator would have avoided all legal costs. However, landlord argues that the adjudicator cannot make awards of more than the deposit.

In order to make my point, I would need to know what information you get from the adjudicator in case the costs of damages exceed the deposit amount.

Are they just telling you something along the lines of "The sum of damaged attributable to the tenant exceed the deposit", or do they give you an assessment, line by line based on the check-out report, what the reasonable repair cost of the damage is and who is responsible for it (even if the total amount exceeds the deposit)?

It would be absolutely great if someone who has used the adjudicator in a deposit dispute could give me a (redacted) example of exactly what information you get back.

Thank you very much!

More knowledgeable posters will be along if you're patient but I believe that, if your deposit is not properly lodged with one of the recognised Deposit Protection Schemes, you can apply via the County Court for up to three times the amount of the deposit. See here:

https://www.gov.uk/tenancy-deposit-protection/if-your-landlord-doesnt-protect-your-deposit

Deposit protection isn't optional, it's a legal requirement and it's no surprise that a landlord who flouts the most basic rules will try to squeeze more money out of you. 

MattMattMattUK

ShadowMango said:

I am in dispute with a highly unreasonable landlord regarding return of deposit. Just to give an idea, they are demanding 100% of refurbishment costs - after almost five years of living in the flat. They are now claiming £18k of costs on a tenancy of £3k per month so ist has become serious. 

Landlord refused to use the TDS adjudicator service. My point is that using the adjudicator would have avoided all legal costs. However, landlord argues that the adjudicator cannot make awards of more than the deposit.

In order to make my point, I would need to know what information you get from the adjudicator in case the costs of damages exceed the deposit amount.

Are they just telling you something along the lines of "The sum of damaged attributable to the tenant exceed the deposit", or do they give you an assessment, line by line based on the check-out report, what the reasonable repair cost of the damage is and who is responsible for it (even if the total amount exceeds the deposit)?

It would be absolutely great if someone who has used the adjudicator in a deposit dispute could give me a (redacted) example of exactly what information you get back.

Thank you very much!

When you say refurbishment cost, are they claiming that you caused damage, or just "fair wear and tear"? After five years a property would be expected to need full cleaning throughout and potentially carpet replacement, bathrooms would need resealing etc. but they would not expect damage, so torn carpets, holes bigger than pin holes in a wall, broken bathroom fittings etc. 

https://www.depositprotection.com/disputes/adjudication

Voyager2002

ShadowMango said:

I am in dispute with a highly unreasonable landlord regarding return of deposit. Just to give an idea, they are demanding 100% of refurbishment costs - after almost five years of living in the flat. They are now claiming £18k of costs on a tenancy of £3k per month so ist has become serious. 

Landlord refused to use the TDS adjudicator service. My point is that using the adjudicator would have avoided all legal costs. However, landlord argues that the adjudicator cannot make awards of more than the deposit.

In order to make my point, I would need to know what information you get from the adjudicator in case the costs of damages exceed the deposit amount.

Are they just telling you something along the lines of "The sum of damaged attributable to the tenant exceed the deposit", or do they give you an assessment, line by line based on the check-out report, what the reasonable repair cost of the damage is and who is responsible for it (even if the total amount exceeds the deposit)?

It would be absolutely great if someone who has used the adjudicator in a deposit dispute could give me a (redacted) example of exactly what information you get back.

Thank you very much!

Was your deposit protected by one of the schemes? If not, as already mentioned, the landlord is in fairly serious trouble and will be obliged to pay you a penalty of up to three times the deposit amount.

If your deposit was indeed protected the landlord really has no option but to use the adjudication scheme: either he returns your deposit or he tells the scheme why the deposit should not be returned. If he wants to make a claim that is not allowed under the scheme, he is free to start court proceedings.

anselld

There has been no suggestion that the deposit is unprotected.  It is not mandatory to use the adjudication scheme and either the Landlord or the Tenant are perfectly entitled to use the Court instead for whatever reason.  The burden of proof is exactly the same and the same rules apply as far as betterment etc is concerned.

  I am not sure how a hypothetical adjudication report will help the OP.  They would be better to research the rules which apply to damage deductions, eg https://www.depositprotection.com/learning-centre/disputes/in-disputes-be-fair

Voyager2002

anselld said:

There has been no suggestion that the deposit is unprotected.  It is not mandatory to use the adjudication scheme and either the Landlord or the Tenant are perfectly entitled to use the Court instead for whatever reason.  The burden of proof is exactly the same and the same rules apply as far as betterment etc is concerned.

So if the landlord wished to use the Court rather than the adjudication scheme, should he tell the DPS to release the deposit? Or provide details of court action and request that the deposit be held pending judgment?

Bookworm225

Voyager2002 said:

anselld said:

There has been no suggestion that the deposit is unprotected.  It is not mandatory to use the adjudication scheme and either the Landlord or the Tenant are perfectly entitled to use the Court instead for whatever reason.  The burden of proof is exactly the same and the same rules apply as far as betterment etc is concerned.

So if the landlord wished to use the Court rather than the adjudication scheme, should he tell the DPS to release the deposit? Or provide details of court action and request that the deposit be held pending judgment?

read this, it answers your question and explains the process in more detail... (the other schemes probably have similar info on their websites if you look) 

What_happens_when_the_Court_is_involved_in_a_tenancy_deposit_dispute_v1.pdf

_Penny_Dreadful

As @anselld has pointed out, it’s not mandatory for either party to use the deposit scheme’s alternative dispute resolution (ADR). If the landlord’s claim was less than or equal to the value of the deposit the court would the landlord take a dim view of the landlord not using the ADR and will likely refer the case back to the scheme. However, where the claim exceeds the value of the deposit then going to court is what the landlord should do. Your landlord might offer mediation first or be advised by the court to try mediation first before advancing to court proceedings. 

Once one party tells the scheme that the dispute is to be resolved through the courts then the scheme cannot release the funds to anyone unless the court refers the case back to the scheme or until the court makes a judgement. 

ShadowMango

Voyager2002 said:

ShadowMango said:

I am in dispute with a highly unreasonable landlord regarding return of deposit. Just to give an idea, they are demanding 100% of refurbishment costs - after almost five years of living in the flat. They are now claiming £18k of costs on a tenancy of £3k per month so ist has become serious. 

Landlord refused to use the TDS adjudicator service. My point is that using the adjudicator would have avoided all legal costs. However, landlord argues that the adjudicator cannot make awards of more than the deposit.

In order to make my point, I would need to know what information you get from the adjudicator in case the costs of damages exceed the deposit amount.

Are they just telling you something along the lines of "The sum of damaged attributable to the tenant exceed the deposit", or do they give you an assessment, line by line based on the check-out report, what the reasonable repair cost of the damage is and who is responsible for it (even if the total amount exceeds the deposit)?

It would be absolutely great if someone who has used the adjudicator in a deposit dispute could give me a (redacted) example of exactly what information you get back.

Thank you very much!

Was your deposit protected by one of the schemes? If not, as already mentioned, the landlord is in fairly serious trouble and will be obliged to pay you a penalty of up to three times the deposit amount.

If your deposit was indeed protected the landlord really has no option but to use the adjudication scheme: either he returns your deposit or he tells the scheme why the deposit should not be returned. If he wants to make a claim that is not allowed under the scheme, he is free to start court proceedings.

The deposit has been protected. There's a bit of a more complicated issue regarding receiving 213(6) prescribed information, but that's besides my question.

The landlord was easily able to refuse to use TDS's ADR, as the rules clearly state that both parties have to agree to it before it goes to adjudication. 

My question is what outcome, hypothetically, we could have had if they had consented to ADR and made a claim higher than the deposit.

ShadowMango

anselld said:

There has been no suggestion that the deposit is unprotected.  It is not mandatory to use the adjudication scheme and either the Landlord or the Tenant are perfectly entitled to use the Court instead for whatever reason.  The burden of proof is exactly the same and the same rules apply as far as betterment etc is concerned.

  I am not sure how a hypothetical adjudication report will help the OP.  

Thanks for the link to damage reduction; I had already studied those carefully.

I want to argue that going to ADR would have given a neutral expert opinion on the questions of disagreement of who is responsible for the individual items of damage, what a reasonable repair cost is, and how much wear and tear should be deducted. This means that, even if the total is larger than the deposit (which I think is unlikely) I would have paid this without further dispute. Crucially, this would have avoided any legal costs.

As it stands, high legal costs were incurred - following my argument unnecessarily - and the court does not have access to the adjudicator's expert opinion.

MattMattMattUK

ShadowMango said:

anselld said:

There has been no suggestion that the deposit is unprotected.  It is not mandatory to use the adjudication scheme and either the Landlord or the Tenant are perfectly entitled to use the Court instead for whatever reason.  The burden of proof is exactly the same and the same rules apply as far as betterment etc is concerned.

  I am not sure how a hypothetical adjudication report will help the OP.  

Thanks for the link to damage reduction; I had already studied those carefully.

I want to argue that going to ADR would have given a neutral expert opinion on the questions of disagreement of who is responsible for the individual items of damage, what a reasonable repair cost is, and how much wear and tear should be deducted. This means that, even if the total is larger than the deposit (which I think is unlikely) I would have paid this without further dispute. Crucially, this would have avoided any legal costs.

I am fairly sure that is not something that the court will take into account.

ShadowMango said:

As it stands, high legal costs were incurred - following my argument unnecessarily - and the court does not have access to the adjudicator's expert opinion.

When you say "high legal costs were incurred", has this already gone to court with you losing and the landlord is now seeking costs as well? Was this Fast Track or Multi Track?