TDS Questions

becky_rtw

I do understand what both OPs are saying, but surely it's a legal obligation to place the deposit within 14 days and my LL has most likely (although not yet proved so this is all a hypothetical discussion) failed in this aspect of their legal obligations.

It is a matter of principal for me...I am most definitely not planning on trashing the place, nor leaving bills unpaid. With transactions like renting, it only works when both sides fulfill their obligations and my LL has failed to do so - why shouldn't I sue them?

I am letting myself in for it now from all the LLs on the board aren't I?

silvercar

If your leaving at the end of the fixed term what have you got to lose by sueing?

a) no reference
b) the landlord being particularly pernickity in your end of tenancy inspection.

If both of these possibilities still bring the balance in favour of going to court, then have your day.

Bungarm2001

YES it IS a legal requirement for the LL/LA to place the deposit, but you are not reading my post...the TDS scheme only came fully into force in April 2007, just over a year ago. Not everyone is a professional LL and some LL's rightly or wrongly are still NOT aware that this requirement exists until it's pointed out to them.

True, every LL should make sure they are aware of ALL legal requirements well before they come into force, but the truth is, some just don't because letting properties is not a major concern for them, just a sideline.

IF your LL was deliberately trying to hang onto your deposit and refusing to place it in a TDS, then you do obviously have reason to get ancy, but it does seem to me that your 'principles' are being driven solely by the thought of scamming a bit of cash from a LL who's only 'crime' is one of neglecting to keep up with current legislation. It seems to me that the LL has now fulfilled his duty where this is concerned.

Of course, if you can prove otherwise and the LL is trying to scam YOU, then I will apologise.

prudryden

If you paid the deposit to an agency, then this is one of the few cases that your claim is against the agent, NOT the LL. Generally, the LL has ultimate responsibility for most things, but in the case of deposit protection - the responsibility rests with whom the deposit was paid to.

clutton_2

thanks pru i didn't know that ... makes sense tho

prudryden

Clutton -
There was a discussion on this subject just recently on landlordzone. I believe Jeffrey and Agent had some interesting legal comments. If you don't find it, let me know and I will try to locate it.

becky_rtw

Thanks Pru thats helpful, I paid my deposit direct to LL, i.e. I handed them the money and they gave me receipt for it. I did not deal with the agency at all. Not sure what happened after I gave LL my deposit though (I think they were trying to circumnavigate the agents fees this time)...I guess I'll see when the thing arrives.

neverdespairgirl

Bungarm2001 wrote: »

it does seem to me that your 'principles' are being driven solely by the thought of scamming a bit of cash from a LL who's only 'crime' is one of neglecting to keep up with current legislation.

If someone has a right in law, can't see how this is "scamming". The LL should get a grip - "ignorance of the law is no defence", of course!

prudryden

There is the letter of the law and, then, there is the spirit of the law. I guess it will depend on how the "third party" feels about the circumstances of the case at the time.

Captain_Mainwaring_2

becky_rtw wrote: »

I do understand what both OPs are saying, but surely it's a legal obligation to place the deposit within 14 days and my LL has most likely (although not yet proved so this is all a hypothetical discussion) failed in this aspect of their legal obligations.

It is a matter of principal for me...I am most definitely not planning on trashing the place, nor leaving bills unpaid. With transactions like renting, it only works when both sides fulfill their obligations and my LL has failed to do so - why shouldn't I sue them?

I am letting myself in for it now from all the LLs on the board aren't I?

As it happens you are too late, you should have made your petty attempt before the landlord registered the deposit, and just having had a chat with a circuit judge they mentioned that in the first place they would only order the landlord to place the money in the scheme, then if he didn't comply would you get your "bonus". They also suggested that they wouldn't entertain costs in the matter.

I really find this sort of thing about as noxious as Esther Rancid promoting ambulance chasing solicitors and those tacky little companies who "exploit a piece of liitle known government legislation" to attempt to make money and get people to weedle out of their debts to the detriment of creditors.

Yes, the landlord has a duty to comply, but if it is a bit late and everything else is otherwise satisfactory, then a simple request to him should be enough.


If you go ahead, I sincerely hope it goes very wrong for you and you get lumbered with the LL's costs as well.