TDS- Should I cash the cheque??

silvercar

prudryden wrote: »

Where do you see these rules? I thought the law was the parliamentary Act itself. The schemes themselves don't make the law surely or am I mistaken on that.

The "word on the web" seems to suggest that tenancies renewed after April 2007 require the deposit to be protected. Whether or not it is written into the law, there is the risk of a tenant taking a landlord to court for not protecting such a deposit.

newbiejolly

So basically you guys think I shouldnt bother taking it to court because It'll be likely that the judge will be a landlord? :huh:

silvercar

newbiejolly wrote: »

So basically you guys think I shouldnt bother taking it to court because It'll be likely that the judge will be a landlord? :huh:

No, because the landlord has given you back more than your deposit so there is a reasonable chance you will lose.

The point of the legislation was to prevent landlord's keeping tenant's deposit for no reason, you have yours back, so a judge may think you are wasting courts time in pursueing this.

prudryden

According to the Act: If your deposit wasn't protected, and the deposit and tenancy was after 6 Apr. , then the Judge MUST order 3xdeposit penalty. Negotiating pre trial for a settlement is ok, but not necessary in these circumstances.

That is how I understand it. Over to you Silver.

newbiejolly

silvercar wrote: »

No, because the landlord has given you back more than your deposit so there is a reasonable chance you will lose.

The point of the legislation was to prevent landlord's keeping tenant's deposit for no reason, you have yours back, so a judge may think you are wasting courts time in pursueing this.

But the LL only gave it back because I sent a letter about tds. The LL refused to give me back my deposit before.

Strapped

You have your money back (+£76) so I don't really understand why you want to put yourself through the time and trouble of a court case which you may or may not win. OK, the place may have been terrible and he was the LL from hell etc but give yourself a break and move on.

newbiejolly

Because I paid for carpets in an apparently furnished flat (LL promised to pay), paint, had to buy plug in heaters because LL made me believe there was central heating (took the boiler out) had to pay more for electric because LL gave me a past tenants electric token metre number, so because id been using it it took ages for the electric company to sort out (a week before i moved out) and they owe me over 200. I had to pay for a phone line I couldnt get because the LL had loads of rubbish in the front so virgin media refused to put one in until LL moved the rubbish (had a contract so still had to pay for months) I ended up with glandular fever (I know I didnt catch it from the flat, but my body would have been run down because of the damp and mould everywhere), constantly had a sore throat and bad chest, had to put up with not having any water 2x, once for a week!!!(no choice but to stay somewhere else) had no hall lights and wonky floor boards for months, the LL made me life HELL for months, I was scared to be there because LL wouldnt even put a decent lock on the front door, I was the only one in the building for 4 months, so why wouldnt I want to take the LL to court????

Plus I wanted to make the LL think twice about treating future tennants so badly.

zebulon

newbiejolly wrote: »

so why wouldnt I want to take the LL to court????

Plus I wanted to make the LL think twice about treating future tennants so badly.

I mean, there is one thing to say, you either go to court or you don't ...
looks like you want (i completly understand why), so go ...

I suppose you're looking for a bit of moral support and people telling you, yeah go for it you're bound to win this etc etc.
But looks like there is no certainty to that unfortunately (considring the few other cases about 3x thingy)
nobody can tell you what the judge would decide.

is there no one you could go to for legal advise, someone you would present all your information and that could tell you if you stand much chance or not

good luck

Edit: maybe you could try to think of other way to share your experience and get the LL a bad name ?

silvercar

prudryden wrote: »

According to the Act: If your deposit wasn't protected, and the deposit and tenancy was after 6 Apr. , then the Judge MUST order 3xdeposit penalty. Negotiating pre trial for a settlement is ok, but not necessary in these circumstances.

That is how I understand it. Over to you Silver.

In theory. The problem is that nothing in life is guaranteed and going to court may not give you the result you want. I don't know how the judge would feel about going to court when you already have the deposit back and some compensation. I don't know whether pursuing the non-protection after the return of the deposit will effect the outcome. I don't know whether going to court when you are no longer the tenant effects the outcome.

Its a risk, only the OP can decide if its worth pursuing.

newbiejolly

zebulon wrote: »

Edit: maybe you could try to think of other way to share your experience and get the LL a bad name ?

Thanks. I'd be happy with that tbh, just not sure how ..