Section 21 Notice but Deposit not protected

MissMoneypenny

silvercar wrote: »

added to which the admin problems of the deposit companies, I can't see a judge throwing out a section 21 notice in say 2011 because the landlord took longer than 14 days to notify the tenant of the depost protection in May 2007.

Why would the admin problems of the deposit companies stop the LL sending the Prescribed Information to their tenant within 14 days? Look at my post 32 and it lists this prescribed information required and the link. LLs would have received this information by email when they joined a deposit scheme, as clutton has confirmed. Or LLs could have done what I did and looked it up on the Internet. Or they could have sought legal advice if they weren't sure what they had to do.

Why would reference numbers coming out late from a deposit scheme, stop a LL giving their tenant the Prescribed Information within 14 days of taking the deposit? The reference number is not part of the Prescribed Information from what I can see from that government link.

MissMoneypenny

danielson81 wrote: »

If we got all the deposit back, would it be worth still claiming back 3x amount of deposit? Would a court just think we are being greedy?

Do you mean if the court awarded you the deposit instead of ordering the LL to put it in one of the schemes? If they did that, the 2004 Housing Act states the court must award you the 3x. You should really seek legal advice for that one.

Or do you mean if you got your deposit back when you moved out and then went for the 3x? I think you have to still be a tenant to get the 3x, but I could be wrong. Again, legal advice should be sought.

Sorry I can't be more help. Perhaps someone who knows about this will come along.

ms_newbie

I would like some advice. I've had a long term tenant who paid rent regularly and for whom i held a deposit. A couple of years ago she was in financial difficulty and asked to use the deposit for her rent which I agreed to. I have records of all of this. Her AST has been renewed a couple of times since then and as I am no longer holding a deposit for her it is not secured in any scheme. My circumstances have changed quite a bit recently and I have issued a notice to quit etc. as I need to sell the property. If she doesnt move out and I need to take her to court what will my position be regarding the protected deposit?

silvercar

ms_newbie wrote: »

I would like some advice. I've had a long term tenant who paid rent regularly and for whom i held a deposit. A couple of years ago she was in financial difficulty and asked to use the deposit for her rent which I agreed to. I have records of all of this. Her AST has been renewed a couple of times since then and as I am no longer holding a deposit for her it is not secured in any scheme. My circumstances have changed quite a bit recently and I have issued a notice to quit etc. as I need to sell the property. If she doesnt move out and I need to take her to court what will my position be regarding the protected deposit?

There was no deposit at the time of renewal after April 2007, so no need to protect.

silvercar

missmoneypenny wrote:

Why would the admin problems of the deposit companies stop the LL sending the Prescribed Information to their tenant within 14 days?

Because some of the deposit schemes undertook to provide the information to the tenant and then didn't or couldn't deliver, so 6 months later decided that they would pass the responsibility back to the landords.

A lot of the information on the internet now is not the same info that was available when deposits were first being protected. One of the original ideas was that it would need to be the deposit schemes that provided the info to tenants so that tenants would know that their deposit was protected. If the info came from landlords it would not be possible to verify it; any landlord could write that they had protected a deposit.

alan44

danielson81 wrote: »

If we got all the deposit back, would it be worth still claiming back 3x amount of deposit? Would a court just think we are being greedy?

The problem you may have is that your landlord may have a very good and expensive lawyer, and you may end up paying their costs if you lose.

Your tenancy agreement has run out, and the landlord legitimately wants you to move out so they can sell the property. They have made an technical error - whether deliberately or otherwise - over your deposit. If they return it in full, no harm is done (the law was drafted to protect tenants from unscrupulous landlords).

You may be able to get some free money. That may or may not cause your landlord and their family hardship. How would you feel if it turned out they could throw you out into the street with no notice because of a technicality?

If they try and withold part of your deposit fair enough, but otherwise I personally think you're being greedy. Trying to get something for nothing. If it doesn't work you could try tripping over a paving stone and suing the council.

danielson81

alan44 wrote: »

If they return it in full, no harm is done (the law was drafted to protect tenants from unscrupulous landlords).

This could be interpreted as "long as your pay the deposit back in full, you/we don't have to bother putting it in a scheme" ?

alan44 wrote: »

If they try and withold part of your deposit fair enough, but otherwise I personally think you're being greedy. Trying to get something for nothing. If it doesn't work you could try tripping over a paving stone and suing the council.

Point taken!

MissMoneypenny

silvercar wrote: »

Because some of the deposit schemes undertook to provide the information to the tenant

Even though the law stated it was the LLs responsibility to do this??? How inept of some LLs.

alan44

danielson81 wrote: »

This could be interpreted as "long as your pay the deposit back in full, you/we don't have to bother putting it in a scheme" ?



Point taken!

But if they in any way try and rip you off, then I would hammer them!

clutton_2

""If the info came from landlords it would not be possible to verify it; any landlord could write that they had protected a deposit.""


when i lodge a deposit with DPS i immediately get back an email with
Depsosit ID number
property address
tenancy start date
period of tenancy
monthly rent
amount of deposit
date paid
tenant name
tenant phone number

i immediately send this, together with the DPS T&Cs (which includes the presecribed info) to my tenant. They can then go to a computer and verify if indeed this info is accurate if they choose to. None of them have as yet.

i dont know what will happen when i issue a new tenancy to an already "protected" deposit - i dont know if WE will have to apply by computer to have the old deposit released, and we then re-deposit it, or whether we can simply keep it in situ.

IF your tenant is not computer literate, it may be a case of going to the library with them to get the deposit released .... yet more time consuming stuff .......

Since DPS have been running the Australian deposit scheme for 8 years, i imagine they have clearly thought out procedures for tenancy renewal.

as soon as i renew an AST i will let you know