deposit protected, but no information given to tenant?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    deposit protected, but no information given to tenant?

    Hi all,

    LL is being difficult about returning by deposit.

    have seen online that he was required to provide me with details of the scheme he used along with certain other information within 30 days. I never received any information from him or leaflets apart from the AST agreement. The only information I ever received was after 1 year from the DPS (saying deposit has changed to SPT ).

    My question is would / how much would the court fine him if the deposit was protected on time, but no information was given to tenant.

    Thanks

    #2
    The minimum they can possibly fine him is the value of the deposit (plus the return of the deposit less allowed deductions), plus legal costs.

    Check that the information (called the Prescribed Information) isn't attached to the tenancy agreement.
    When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
    Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

    Comment


      #3
      Nothing was attached to the tenancy agreement. the agent was very laid back, and also didn't bother with an inventory. He no longer works at the agency and the new agent is being difficult (of course he claims its the landlord)

      So to clarify - my deposit is £1000, i would get minimum £2000?

      Also whats stopping him claiming he did give it to me? is normal procedure to get the tenant to sign he received it?

      Comment


        #4
        The deposit is already your money, so you'd receive £1000 as a penalty on the landlord.

        There would be a court case, so if your landlord claimed to have given you the prescribed information it would depend on who the court believed.

        You might find that a letter before action to the landlord threatening to sue them for the return of the deposit and that you will, in parallel, apply for the penalty might speed up the return of the deposit.
        When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
        Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

        Comment


          #5
          You are still liable for any damage, and, if you take this to court, you can expect the landlord to counter-sue for compensation for damage, etc, so you might not get back the full original deposit.

          It is advisable to make a reasonable offer towards damage before going to court, as the court might decide to aware at least some of the legal costs against you.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by leaseholder64 View Post
            It is advisable to make a reasonable offer towards damage before going to court, as the court might decide to aware at least some of the legal costs against you.
            what legal costs? he failed to inform me about my deposit protection scheme.

            Comment


              #7
              The costs of the counter action for damage to the property.

              Costs are somewhat discretionary, but if, say the damage exceeded the deposit but you demanded all the deposit back, I could see the judge saying that both of you were at fault, and maybe leaving you to pay your own costs.

              The landlord is on the low end of the culpability scale as he did protect, and did do it on time, but just forgot the paperwork.

              Also it is difficult to prove that you ddn't get and lose the paperwork.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by leaseholder64 View Post

                Also it is difficult to prove that you ddn't get and lose the paperwork.
                is it not impossible to prove you didn't receive the paperwork?

                Comment


                  #9
                  If you just want your deposit back then follow the advice in the last paragraph of #4. If you are looking for a penalty payment then you will have to take the landlord to court, but you probably wouldn't get much more money if there are substantial legitimate deductions.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by apple25 View Post
                    is it not impossible to prove you didn't receive the paperwork?
                    The landlord may offer evidence the other way.
                    I scan a copy of what I send to the tenant and get a post office certificate to show I posted a large envelope weighing roughly what you'd expect a bundle of paper equal to the scanned document to weigh.
                    It's not perfect, but it's a lot of trouble to go to not to actually post the document.

                    The evidence level is "on the balance of probabilities", so the landlord would have to come up with something that was sufficient to overcome the tenant's assertion that they didn't receive anything.

                    It is possible to support a claim that you didn't receive anything, an email asking where it was, for example.
                    When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
                    Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
                      It is possible to support a claim that you didn't receive anything, an email asking where it was, for example.
                      Or even an entirely fictitous E-mail placed on your imap server in retrospect questioning where it was.

                      Which is why no sensible IT literate judge would ever take evidence of this sort seriously except in a minor way as part of a mass of other information.

                      Comment

                      Latest Activity

                      Collapse

                      Working...
                      X