Tenancy issues - No Deposit Scheme, demanding deposit back

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

    #16
    If you follow Nearly Legal s21 flowchart, the logic correspond to my views.

    Start at page 13 - is this the first tenancy agreement, if so within 30 days, if not was it protected in a previous tenancy with no limitation on dates.
    I am not a lawyer, nor am I licensed to provide any regulated advice. None of my posts should be treated as legal or financial advice.

    I do not answer questions through private messages which should be posted publicly on the forum.

    Comment


      #17
      Sorry, going back to my original question - Should I return deposit to tenant OR put in DPS scheme late (now), accepting that I could pay a penalty by putting into DPS late? As I have a tenant from hell, I would be better protected longer term, SPT etc by depositing late?

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by KTC View Post
        I don't understand/agree that a section 21 notice isn't "associated with a specific tenancy". An existing s21 notice is invalidated by the granting/agreement of a new tenancy between the landlord and tenant. s21(2) of the Housing Act 1988 are there specifically to provide an exception to allow a s21(1) notice to roll over to apply to a SPT.
        I'd be interested to see any case where a new tenancy has been granted which invalidates a previous served s21 notice (es[especially given that the chances of this arising must be remote).
        s21(2) is, I think, just there to cover off the SPT issue.

        Paragraph 38 of Superstrike judgment explicitly says "the tenant should be treated as having paid the amount of the deposit to the landlord in respect of the new tenancy, by way of set-off against the landlord's obligation to account to the tenant for the deposit in respect of the previous tenancy". Whether you summarise that as the landlord deemed to have returned the deposit in full, or go with "with such deductions as are agreed between the landlord and tenant", the effect is still the same.
        I think that's actually the reverse of what's being said.
        It fairly explicitly says that the receipt of the deposit happens because the deposit hasn't been returned - that's what set-off means in that context.

        Further, s215B of the Housing Act 2004 (deemed compliance) subsection (1)(b) - "(ignoring any requirement to take particular steps within any specified period)" - would make absolutely no sense otherwise. It explicitly allow for deemed compliance in a replacement tenancy even if the initial requirements was not compiled with on time. If the landlord must return the deposit or wait for the tenant to sue, there would be no point to allow them deemed compliance in a future replacement tenancy.
        Yes, there would. It would mean that the landlord can protect the deposit and not have to repeat the process with each new tenancy in order to avoid the s214 penalty for non-compliance.
        It doesn't mean, as I see it, that s215(1A) shouldn't still apply.

        That part of the Deregulation Act was designed to clear up the mess created by Superstrike, where well intentioned landlords were being caught out retrospectively on a technical problem with the law of property. I don't see any reason to infer that it was also intending to give greater scope to use section 21 notices.

        I cannot agree with Tessa post there. That was from a couple of months after Superstrike and long before Deregulation Act. I don't know if her views have changed since then. I don't see how one can logically go from new tenancy, all the obligations applies afresh with new additional penalty for non-compliance, but somehow the sanction from the previous tenancy continues even though the tenancy has ended.
        The date of the post concerns me also, but as I don't see the changes in the Deregulation Act as having the same effect as you do, it hasn't actually changed my thinking.

        If you follow Nearly Legal s21 flowchart, the logic correspond to my views.

        Start at page 13 - is this the first tenancy agreement, if so within 30 days, if not was it protected in a previous tenancy with no limitation on dates.
        That's more concerning.
        I feel that the sentence "I don't agree with Nearly Legal" is usually a great blaring klaxon* of a warning.

        *Other sirens are available.
        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


          #19
          Originally posted by llplug View Post
          Sorry, going back to my original question - Should I return deposit to tenant OR put in DPS scheme late (now), accepting that I could pay a penalty by putting into DPS late? As I have a tenant from hell, I would be better protected longer term, SPT etc by depositing late?
          In my view, you're fine protecting it in a custodial scheme so long as you have no intention of serving a s21 notice while the current fixed term tenancy is ongoing. jpkeates disagrees and think you wouldn't be able to serve a valid s21 at any time unless and until you return the deposit first (or have an agreement with the tenant to deduct the deposit against unpaid rent say).
          I am not a lawyer, nor am I licensed to provide any regulated advice. None of my posts should be treated as legal or financial advice.

          I do not answer questions through private messages which should be posted publicly on the forum.

          Comment


            #20
            Despite my disagreement about the long term consequences, there's no downside to following KTC's advice and your protecting the deposit and giving the PI to the tenant now.
            Given the tenant's demands and the chance that you'll change your mind, I'd suggest using an insured scheme (so you keep the actual cash in your control).

            KTC is usually right about legal issues anyway!
            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


              #21
              Latest update: I have now put deposit into DPS who have notified tenant - I have also let tenant know that deposit is now protected and received a reply to the effect I am to late. "See you in court". Tenant for some reason doesn't appear to want to communicate/reason with me, going to use the system to their advantage, I'm in for a whole lot of bother as some would say. Anyone know of any good/reasonably priced legal representation?

              Comment


                #22
                Just offer, in writing, 2xdeposit +£1 regarding your late (you were late) breach of the law. Law passed twice by parliament, 2nd time giving landlords more than twice the time to do some simple admin.

                You want to do all you can to avoid legal disputes.

                Oh I do hope my agents are protecting deposits properly
                I am legally unqualified: If you need to rely on advice check it with a suitable authority - eg a solicitor specialising in landlord/tenant law...

                Comment


                  #23
                  Originally posted by llplug View Post
                  received a reply to the effect I am to late. "See you in court".
                  Well, it is too late for no penalty but you knew that already. Like theartfullodger said, make a offer to settle. I'll make it a formal Part 36 offer to avoid any argument. The +£1 is unnecssary, if you made the offer, they need to beat it. It is highly unlikely for a court to award the maximum 3x for a late (as opposed to no) protection.

                  Don't forget to serve the prescribed information correctly.
                  I am not a lawyer, nor am I licensed to provide any regulated advice. None of my posts should be treated as legal or financial advice.

                  I do not answer questions through private messages which should be posted publicly on the forum.

                  Comment


                    #24
                    This is obviously a complex situation but how do you now the tenant really will go to court? Is there enough "dosh" in it for the no win no fee types? Tenant may not do it alone. Also can the OP now issue a section 21 now the deposit is protected? I think I would be tempted to do that if I could at this stage and deal with the fallout sooner rather than later.
                    Unshackled by the chains of idle vanity, A modest manatee, that's me

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Originally posted by islandgirl View Post
                      Also can the OP now issue a section 21 now the deposit is protected?
                      No, OP is still in the original tenancy. And probably still in the first four months anyway (assuming England).
                      I am not a lawyer, nor am I licensed to provide any regulated advice. None of my posts should be treated as legal or financial advice.

                      I do not answer questions through private messages which should be posted publicly on the forum.

                      Comment


                        #26
                        This is the original tenancy, 2.5 months into tenancy, they have said they intend following through with legal action and will withhold any rent until matter resolved.

                        I was reading through tenancy agreement tenants had signed, guess this does not hold water, even though it doesn't mention a Deposit Scheme?

                        Handling of the Deposit

                        The Landlord will arrange for the Deposit to be held in a bank or building society account

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Following through with legal action is their absolute right.

                          Not paying rent is breach of contract.

                          From what you have stated, you will undoubtedly lose a deposit protection case:

                          Your choice, your decision, what you do.
                          I am legally unqualified: If you need to rely on advice check it with a suitable authority - eg a solicitor specialising in landlord/tenant law...

                          Comment


                            #28
                            Originally posted by llplug View Post
                            This is the original tenancy, 2.5 months into tenancy, they have said they intend following through with legal action and will withhold any rent until matter resolved.
                            You can't stop them taking legal action.

                            But nor can they withhold rent, which I would, politely, point out to them.
                            Once they owe two month's rent, you can serve notice (under section 8, Housing Act) and they can be evicted.
                            That notice can be issued regardless of the deposit failure - however, it is quite possible that, when the issue in court, the judge would award the penalty associated with the deposit failure and deduct the amount from the rent owed.

                            So, tactically, it might be worth waiting until the tenant owes enough rent so that even if four times the value of the deposit is deducted, two month's rent is still owed. Which is likely to be about seven month's (or so)'s rent.
                            Originally posted by llplug View Post
                            I was reading through tenancy agreement tenants had signed, guess this does not hold water, even though it doesn't mention a Deposit Scheme?

                            Handling of the Deposit

                            The Landlord will arrange for the Deposit to be held in a bank or building society account
                            I would say that that is likely to encourage the judge to award the maximum penalty, because it makes it very clear that you intended not to do what you are required to with regard to the deposit.

                            Where on earth did you find a tenancy agreement with a sentence like that in it?

                            For some tenants, seeing a sentence like that in a tenancy agreement would tell them exactly what kind of landlord they were dealing with.
                            They'd regard handing over their deposit as an investment opportunity to at least double their money.

                            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


                              #29
                              Originally posted by KTC View Post

                              No, OP is still in the original tenancy. And probably still in the first four months anyway (assuming England).
                              Thank you for the clarification. I think in this circumstance I would go for eviction as soon as they owe 2 months and take any penalty awarded to them on the chin. I could not stand to wait 7 months (though I see the logic)
                              Unshackled by the chains of idle vanity, A modest manatee, that's me

                              Comment


                                #30
                                Was this an old tenancy agreement rather than a current agreement from a reputable source, please?

                                If so, wonder what else is wrong ...
                                I am legally unqualified: If you need to rely on advice check it with a suitable authority - eg a solicitor specialising in landlord/tenant law...

                                Comment

                                Latest Activity

                                Collapse

                                • Reply to Been living in my own BTL...
                                  by boletus
                                  Speak to an independent mortgage broker before doing anything.

                                  It's an unintentional mistake.

                                  The Hunter blacklist is mainly used to frighten the children.
                                  05-12-2021, 16:49 PM
                                • Been living in my own BTL...
                                  by eshjie
                                  I have only just realized the pickle I have got myself into. And would like some advice.

                                  In Jan/Feb 2021 I split up with my long term partner and moved out. My flat (which I lived in originally) which was previously let out to a tennant was empty and so I moved back in as I had nowhere...
                                  05-12-2021, 14:57 PM
                                • Reply to Dogs
                                  by jpkeates
                                  I wouldn't, but it does depend on what type of dog.
                                  You should assume your carpets will all need replacing.
                                  05-12-2021, 16:21 PM
                                • Dogs
                                  by Bridge2020
                                  My tenant has asked if he can get a dog. Where do I stand on this ?...
                                  05-12-2021, 11:23 AM
                                • Reply to Been living in my own BTL...
                                  by jpkeates
                                  The lender won't repossess initially.
                                  If they're unhappy, they'll "ask" for the mortgage to be repaid, they'll only repossess if you can't repay the mortgage.

                                  There's a risk you'll be blacklisted anyway.
                                  05-12-2021, 16:16 PM
                                • Reply to STA, Section 8 and Court delays/Christmas
                                  by jpkeates
                                  Assuming it's an AST (STA's are Scottish)...
                                  You don't have to renew the tenancy, just let it become periodic.
                                  And, you're right, don't renew it.

                                  To repossess, you'll either have to attend court or pay a solicitor to do so on your behalf.

                                  If the tenant doesn't owe...
                                  05-12-2021, 16:13 PM
                                • STA, Section 8 and Court delays/Christmas
                                  by Noisette
                                  Hello, I'm hoping to clarify a few points with landlords who've had experience of non-payment of rent and Section 8 notice. Background: We emigrated in 2007. UK house sale fell through, but we've had good tenants under an STA renewed annually since 2012. In summer 2020, they had difficulties paying...
                                  05-12-2021, 13:59 PM
                                • Reply to Been living in my own BTL...
                                  by eshjie
                                  Thanks for the reply. Yeah this sounds like the right thing to do.

                                  Thankfully I have enough in investments to pay off this property (flat) otherwise I'd be really panicking. Worse case it they tried to repo i could cash eveything out and pay to keep the property.

                                  Really don't...
                                  05-12-2021, 16:12 PM
                                • Reply to STA, Section 8 and Court delays/Christmas
                                  by theartfullodger
                                  Paragraphs.

                                  Do you have paperwork from HMRC permitting tenants not to deduct 20% rent for taxman? (Required for non-uk-resident landlords)

                                  Think (hope) you mean AST not STA.

                                  There's almost always no evictions over Xmas. (Court practice).

                                  Have you...
                                  05-12-2021, 16:05 PM
                                • Reply to Been living in my own BTL...
                                  by theartfullodger
                                  They may well already know from the "hunter" system. Strongly suggest you do what we'd all like all agents & tenants to do.Be honest, 'fess up.

                                  I'm confident they have the right to repo , more dangerous you might find yourself blacklisted on hunter system and find any remortgage,...
                                  05-12-2021, 15:50 PM
                                Working...
                                X