Deposit Mess

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

    Deposit Mess

    Dear All

    This is the first time, I've written on an internet forum. I hope that somebody will be able to help...


    Here is a brief overview of our situation. Six tenants moved into the property two years ago on a joint shorthold tenancy agreement. Since then, only two of the original tenants have stayed in the house. Every time a tenant has moved out the remaining tenants have found a replacement.

    The new tenants have requested (verbally) to be included on a new/revised tenancy agreement but the landlord has never produced this document, despite frequent reminders. The original agreement was for six months with provision that it becomes a ‘rolling’ tenancy once the six months elapsed.

    All of the tenants have paid a deposit of one months rent, which the landlord has accepted separately from each tenant.

    Fairly recently, it became apparent that the landlord did not put our deposits into a deposit protection scheme. He also served us notice to quit because we weren’t prepared to put up with the building work he was carrying out. We have just moved out and we have left the property in good repair.

    One of the tenants is staying on in the property, the rest of us have found other places to live. Unfortunately, following the dispute about building work, the relationship between the landlord and some of the tenants has not been very good.

    Some of the tenants have received their deposit money back, but others haven’t heard from the landlord despite numerous calls and e-mail messages.

    Hopefully we won’t need to resort to legal action in order to get our full deposit back, but I would like to know where we stand because of the lack of a written tenancy agreement with all of the tenants names on it. Does the previous agreement still apply even though there are new tenants? Also, one of the tenants (the one staying on in the property) hasn’t paid his rent for the last month. Is the landlord able to use this as grounds to withhold any of the deposit from the other tenants?

    Thanks for any help

    #2
    As six people cannot hold a legal estate or interest jointly, which two of the six remain? Are they within the first four people named on the Letting Agreement, in strict order of the names as they appear in the definition of T?
    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
      The remaining 2 remaining tenants happen to be 1 and 4 on the list of 6 tenants.

      The agreement hasn't been witnessed either. It would be fair to say that neither party was very good at dotting the i s and crossing the t s when we first moved in. On my part, I wasn't aware of the deposit scheme and we accepted a promise from the landlord that it would be protected.

      Comment


        #4
        So the Tenancy Agreement might still be valid as:
        a. T1/4 are amongst of the original four tenants; and
        b. both still reside (thereby retaining the Tenancy Agreement's status as an AST); so
        c. both are still bound.

        T2/3 are still bound, even though:
        a. both have long-gone; and
        b. neither now resides.

        T5/6 are not now bound, even if they had been at first (which I'd deny but some other LZ members would uphold).
        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
          Thanks Jeffrey

          Presumably the landlord isn't allowed to withold the deposit from some of the tenants and not others.

          It appears that he is treating the tenants as if they have individual agreements with him and not a joint tenancy.

          He has a grudge against the 3 tenants who confronted him about the excessive building work and is making things as difficult as he can for them.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by JPR15 View Post
            Presumably the landlord isn't allowed to withold the deposit from some of the tenants and not others.
            True. If there's one letting (even though to >1 people), there's one deposit (even though paid in bits by >1 people)

            Originally posted by JPR15 View Post
            It appears that he is treating the tenants as if they have individual agreements with him and not a joint tenancy.
            Irrelevant. There aren't individual agreements, are there?
            In post #1, you said that tenants moved into the property two years ago on a joint shorthold tenancy agreement..
            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

            Latest Activity

            Collapse

            Working...
            X