Joint AST then sole- first's deposit kept by L for second

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

    Joint AST then sole- first's deposit kept by L for second

    I have a friend (Miss X) who started a joint tenancy with her partner (Mr Y) in February 2009. A deposit of £575 was paid which was not protected.

    In November 2009 Miss X & Mr Y parted (partly due to Mr Y's non-payment of rent) and a new tenancy agreement was signed in Miss X's name only. The original deposit was not returned, the landlord kept it for the new tenancy.

    In Feb 2010, after serving an invalid s21, the landlord protected the deposit with DPS. However, the landlord has stated the tenancy date is February 2009, whilst stating the tenant is Miss X - ie the sole tenancy, with no mention of Mr Y as a tenant.

    I have a feeling that this deposit is not clearly lodged against either tenancy and that therefore the landlord would not be able claim on it when Miss X leaves.

    Am I right? How would Miss X get this across to DPS if landlord tries to claim on the deposit for any reason?

    #2
    For how long was the joint-names AST granted? Was its fixed term still running when Mr Y ran?
    JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
    1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
    2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
    3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
    4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by jeffrey View Post
      For how long was the joint-names AST granted? Was its fixed term still running when Mr Y ran?
      Complex. It was in the 2nd 6 month fixed term - but landlord gave ultimatum - Mr Y goes or you both (and 2 young kids) go. I know that would have been illegal eviction - but they didn't. A new agreement was signed by just Miss X in Nov 2009.

      Comment


        #4
        But if an X+Y term was still running, L was not competent to re-let to X alone.
        JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
        1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
        2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
        3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
        4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

        Comment


          #5
          That may be so - but I think one has to regard X+Y as having surrendered tenancy, thus allowing L to let to X.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Snorkerz View Post

            Am I right? How would Miss X get this across to DPS if landlord tries to claim on the deposit for any reason?
            Miss X could produce evidence such as the joint tenancy agreement dated Feb 2009 (the date LL told the DPS the tenancy began), and the new contract dated Nov 2009. I imagine that'd be enough at least to put a spanner in the works.

            I would also check which contract clauses the prescribed info, presumably sent in Feb 2010, refers to in terms of allowable deductions. It'd make a difference if, say, Clause 15 of contract 1 says deductions can be made for rent arrears, whereas Clause 15 of contract 2 is about T not playing loud music after 11pm (though it's a long shot as I imagine LL would have used very similar contracts for both tenancies, but you never know).

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Snorkerz View Post
              That may be so - but I think one has to regard X+Y as having surrendered tenancy, thus allowing L to let to X.
              ..until Y returns and claims harassment. And damages.
              JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
              1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
              2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
              3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
              4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by jeffrey View Post
                ..until Y returns and claims harassment. And damages.
                I agree - but not my problem. In this instance I am firmly on Ts side

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by westminster View Post
                  I would also check which contract clauses the prescribed info, presumably sent in Feb 2010, refers to in terms of allowable deductions. It'd make a difference if, say, Clause 15 of contract 1 says deductions can be made for rent arrears, whereas Clause 15 of contract 2 is about T not playing loud music after 11pm (though it's a long shot as I imagine LL would have used very similar contracts for both tenancies, but you never know).
                  Miss X claims no prescribed info sent. I haven't suggested using this as an obstacle to the s21 (yet) because Miss X actually wants out of the tenancy.

                  Miss X is somewhat daunted by the prospect of fighting for her deposit (although I have now convinced her that she should at least try). So I am trying to prepare her for claiming it by reassuring her that "we" know exactly how to handle the DPS dispute. There are no serious damages, just wear and tear comensurate with 2 toddlers.

                  The landlord has not, so far, been very keen to follow legal process and is now threatening to evict on 2 June (no court order). LL tried this in February so I have given the relative advice so that should go without a hitch.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by westminster View Post
                    I would also check which contract clauses the prescribed info, presumably sent in Feb 2010, refers to in terms of allowable deductions. It'd make a difference if, say, Clause 15 of contract 1 says deductions can be made for rent arrears, whereas Clause 15 of contract 2 is about T not playing loud music after 11pm (though it's a long shot as I imagine LL would have used very similar contracts for both tenancies, but you never know).
                    Nah - identical contracts

                    Comment

                    Latest Activity

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X