Taking L to court; major dispute re deposit protection

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

  • Taking L to court; major dispute re deposit protection

    Hi all,

    Long story but we have been excellent tenants and the landlord has turned out to be a complete ****.

    Anyway, we have finally had enough and I taking him to court because he has failed to protect our deposit.

    I rang up the three schemes this morning and none of them have heard anything about this address. Also asked the ll on a number of occassions where our deposit is being held and each time he has brushed it off and started talking about something else.

    Since moving in in July 2007 we have heard NOTHING and seen NO documentation or anything at all to do with the TDPS. In fact only a few months back did I find out that the TDPS even existed!

    I have decided to take him to court and have read that the landlord must tell the tenant within 14 days of moving in the details about how the deposit is protected... yet I've also just read (on these forums) about someone saying that if the case goes to court and as long as the landlord puts the deposit under a scheme before the court date then he is protected and not liable in paying us 3 x the amount of the deposit...

    Can someone clear this up please?

  • #2
    Yep, with the DPS. If the landlord even deposits in in this scheme on the day of the court hearing then he has fulfilled his duties. This is because the scheme has accepted it outside of the 14 day period. Its the legislation wording which the judge looks at.

    Anyways i would write to the landlord telling him you wish to take him to court. This alone should be enough to make him protect it. Send it recorded so you have proof he has received it as it can be used in court.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by LandlordLee View Post
      Yep, with the DPS. If the landlord even deposits in in this scheme on the day of the court hearing then he has fulfilled his duties. This is because the scheme has accepted it outside of the 14 day period. Its the legislation wording which the judge looks at.

      Anyways i would write to the landlord telling him you wish to take him to court. This alone should be enough to make him protect it. Send it recorded so you have proof he has received it as it can be used in court.
      thats a bit of a loophole then isnt it ? Why is it that it states on the government website (direct.gov.uk) that the 14 day rule applies to the TDPS yet it doesn't state that "but it doesn't apply to the DPS"???

      Thats a bit daft.

      Thanks for letting me know anyyway

      Comment


      • #4
        just be careful because i suspect my old landlord did not protect my deposit. same as you did not have any paperwork/documents, no mention of it atall and when i moved out i didnt not hear anything about getting it back. Its all going to court now but ive since found out she is a member of the TDS so even though i recieved no verbal or written confirmation that its protected i might found out that it was all along.
        You need to weigh up if its work it or not or whether you are just doing it to get one up on a horrible landlord.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Shelly24 View Post
          just be careful because i suspect my old landlord did not protect my deposit. same as you did not have any paperwork/documents, no mention of it atall and when i moved out i didnt not hear anything about getting it back. Its all going to court now but ive since found out she is a member of the TDS so even though i recieved no verbal or written confirmation that its protected i might found out that it was all along.
          You need to weigh up if its work it or not or whether you are just doing it to get one up on a horrible landlord.
          i've asked my landlord on 3 seperate occassions where its being held but each time he's never told me, and i've always asked him nicely as well, no pressure or anything like that.

          Wouldn't it be simple enough to go "oh yeah its with this scheme etc."

          Being that he hasn't it really makes me think that he has not protected the scheme. But I was more interested in this 14 day ruling than anything.

          The law is a complete and utter joke to behold -

          It states in one part that the Tenant can take the Landlord to court because he has not protected the deposit.

          Yet in reality the landlord can NOW protect the deposit on the day of the court hearing and not be forced to pay 3x the amount!!!!

          Good old English Law makng perfect sense again then!!! hahaha.

          Comment


          • #6
            That's ok - most of us landlords think the law relating to property letting is c**p too, but not, of course, for the same reasons that you do!!
            Mrs Jones
            I am not an expert - my posts are my opinion and should not be taken as fact!!

            Comment


            • #7
              if the landlord can still protect the deposit on the same day as the court hearing then why the hell didn't these landlords ... (extracted from the wikipedia)..


              "June 2008: In a case which came before the Court in Cardiff where the letting agent failed to protect the deposit, the landlord had to pay the tenants compensation equal to 3x the deposit of £900 (total: £2,700 + costs) and also refund the original deposit in full. In Gloucester in March, a landlord was required to take the same action even though there were rent arrears."

              Also, if what you are saying is correct (that the landlord has until the court hearing day to deposit the money) then why don't all landlords do this and think "**** the tenancy deposit scheme and the 14 day ruling - if I get taken court I'll just pay it then"...

              Am I right or am I right haha

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by smr View Post

                "June 2008: In a case which came before the Court in Cardiff where the letting agent failed to protect the deposit, the landlord had to pay the tenants compensation equal to 3x the deposit of £900 (total: £2,700 + costs) and also refund the original deposit in full. In Gloucester in March, a landlord was required to take the same action even though there were rent arrears."

                D
                S'obvious innit, it was a crap LA who didn't keep up with the law, and the LL probably wasn't much better.

                The fact is though, that where a LL protects the deposit late most courts are accepting that it is protected and therefore not applying the sanction. Right or wrong, that is the way it is.
                I offer no guarantee that anything I say is correct. wysiwyg

                Comment


                • #9
                  Very true. As the schme evolves, if it becomes apparent that significant numbers of LLs are doing this, they may well turn the heat up a little.

                  The fundamental problem is that the leglislation itself (especially the sections dealing with how the penalties are to be imposed) is a pig's ear of a piece of drafting and it defies clear interpretation. Hence the confusion and the fact that different judges have ruled differently in apparently identical circumstances.

                  Wish they'd sent me this sort of stuff to proof-read!
                  'Pause you who read this, and think for a moment of the long chain of iron or gold, of thorns or flowers, that would never have bound you, but for the formation fo the first link on one memorable day'. Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Hi this is UNTRUE

                    Our daughter was renting LL wanted to put rent up whilst discussing with "Shelter" about fairness of this they asked her about her deposit & was it protected
                    She wrote to LA giving 14 days to provide details (she had been his tenant for 6 months at this point)
                    He failed to do so
                    Their contract ended they moved out
                    He didn't return deposit

                    Started small claims for deposit
                    Was advised to claim for compensation at 3 times deposit + deposit + interest (you need to stipulate this right from start on forms) + loss of wages
                    Total just over £5000

                    His excuse was he had protected it (he had and within 14 days of tenancy starting )
                    He didnt get the recorded delivery letter ! (hmmm)
                    He simply forgot to tell her about it (no actually never told her even after her written request)

                    He was found guilty CCJ awarded against him
                    He appealed Judge threw it out

                    We now have a solicitor serving a 3rd party debt order freezing his business bank account as LA has done nothing about paying

                    You can sue either the LL or the LA

                    Happy to provide details if it helps anyone


                    JUSTICE

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by house275 View Post
                      His excuse was he had protected it (he had and within 14 days of tenancy starting )

                      He simply forgot to tell her about it (no actually never told her even after her written request)

                      He was found guilty CCJ awarded against him
                      So presumably he was found liable because he had not given your daughter the info required within 14 days.
                      Why has your daughter not got the deposit back?
                      I offer no guarantee that anything I say is correct. wysiwyg

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        We are set on taking the landlord to court but we are still renting in his property. Would it be better to follow this court action once we have moved to a new address?

                        we aren't getting on with him and we want to move but at the moment we are in the process of saving up for a new deposit on a new place and also the first month's rent + 150 quid credit check fees.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by jta View Post
                          So presumably he was found liable because he had not given your daughter the info required within 14 days.
                          Why has your daughter not got the deposit back?


                          Hi

                          Yes that is correct he breached the legislation by failing to provide the details
                          She has now received a chq for the deposit from him (arrived the day before 1st court date)
                          She didn't know where to start looking for the deposit or if he had protected it
                          We know now that she could have approached the deposit schemes
                          The first time we saw her deposit cert was when he gave it to the judge at court


                          However this process cost her a whole array of fees coming to over £500 in total (these were added to her costs)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by house275 View Post
                            Hi

                            Yes that is correct he breached the legislation by failing to provide the details
                            She has now received a chq for the deposit from him (arrived the day before 1st court date)
                            She didn't know where to start looking for the deposit or if he had protected it
                            We know now that she could have approached the deposit schemes
                            The first time we saw her deposit cert was when he gave it to the judge at court


                            However this process cost her a whole array of fees coming to over £500 in total (these were added to her costs)
                            you are eligible for free legal advice so she shouldnt have accrued those £500 fees if she was on a low income though?

                            edit - my bad, i see she didn't because she didn't go through the schemes. We are getting free legal advice and wont have to pay anything when we take our landlord to court.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Hi Guys

                              We have a similar problem, our tenants turned out to be horrific, they turned cream carpets black, had a dog when we didnt permit animals, left the house filthy, damaged furniture and wrecked some personal possessions we had left behind. We were paying a management company to look after the property for us and have just found out the company never registered the deposit on the scheme. We are witholding the deposit but arent sure what to do in terms of un unregistered deposit. The tenant has already turned nasty and this could come back to haunt us?

                              Thanks

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              • This is a NO isn't it? Seems iffy to me, what do you think?
                                Berlingogirl
                                This is a NO isn't it? Seems iffy to me, what do you think? Any insights? My ad is on Gumtree.



                                "Hello, I'm A***** a British America Business man, I have a business project in your area and I'll like to rent your apartment for the period of 6 month and I'll like to know...
                                27-07-2017, 13:57 PM
                              • Reply to This is a NO isn't it? Seems iffy to me, what do you think?
                                MrShed


                                I'm assuming you are posting this for a laugh
                                27-07-2017, 14:22 PM
                              • Reply to This is a NO isn't it? Seems iffy to me, what do you think?
                                nukecad
                                I'm surprised that you are even asking, it's obviously some kind of scam.

                                At the very least phishing for your personal contact details.

                                "British America Business man" who can't spell 'American' or even write English properly? - "my personal assistance and he...
                                27-07-2017, 14:11 PM
                              • Burglary Damage - Who Pays?
                                Pb21
                                Our rented flat was broken into, in the process the Yale lock was broken and cost £100 to repair. The landlord is refusing to pay this on the basis we didn’t also lock the door with the mortice lock. We didn’t use the mortice lock as it wasn’t working although the landlord did not know this....
                                25-07-2017, 11:40 AM
                              • Reply to Burglary Damage - Who Pays?
                                John Duff
                                Following on from my last post, had the tenant not informed the police and landlord at the time, they would have failed in their duty. I therefore would expect the tenant to foot the bill at the end of the tenancy or sooner.
                                27-07-2017, 13:45 PM
                              • Tenant's energy debt.
                                Gordonmrln
                                I am a landlord of a 2 bed end terrace, the property is owned out right. I am registered Disabled and this was the main reason I decided to rent my property out. As it was not a suitable property for my Disability. I would have to make some major changes that would devalue my property like installing...
                                20-07-2017, 22:08 PM
                              • Reply to Tenant's energy debt.
                                Gordonmrln
                                Hi there, I've also been looking into the office of fair trading as nobody has said whether you believe that E.on or that LCS have acted is the correct manner when looking into a debt. well I have found out this piece of information and would like to know your thoughts and views if its correct and I'm...
                                27-07-2017, 13:30 PM
                              • Reply to Burglary Damage - Who Pays?
                                John Duff
                                Criminal damage not connected with the tenant occurred during the tenancy and was reported as such at the time. It is not the case that the tenant caused or was responsible for loss of value beyond wear and tear.

                                I'm just stating my view which appears to be backed up from sources other...
                                27-07-2017, 13:15 PM
                              • Reply to Burglary Damage - Who Pays?
                                jpkeates
                                If the tenancy ended and the lock was broken, it would be a loss in value beyond fair wear and tear and I'd expect the tenant to compensate the landlord for it.
                                Same as any other damage.

                                What's different about it during the tenancy?
                                27-07-2017, 13:03 PM
                              • Reply to Burglary Damage - Who Pays?
                                John Duff
                                Yes, they have a duty of care but not the same responsibilities as a lease/freeholder.

                                If I was the tenant, I'd refuse to pay. This is assuming I hadn't been grossly negligent and had reported the damage at the earliest opportunity to both the police and the landlord. I would expect a TDS...
                                27-07-2017, 12:55 PM
                              Working...
                              X