LL not protected deposit. What should he do.

[toys19]

A mate has foolishly not protected the deposit for his tenants.

AST started april 2012

Tenant is 8 weeks behind in rent, has trashed the house and so LL served what appears to be legal section 21 in july 2012 for quit end of oct 2012.

I reckon seeing as he hasn't protected dep his section 21 is invalid?

I think this is what he should do but I'm not sure if I am correct:

1) Protect deposit and do prescribed info.
2) Re issue valid notice.
3) Take the 3x deposit hit when tenant takes LL to court over lack of protection, but still be able to evict under section 21?

Is this the best way to go about it?
Can anyone advise how can he get himself back on the straight and narrow, and what the financial legal implications are for him now?

Thanks

toys

[MSaxp]

No. Return the deposit to the tenant. Get proof of that. Serve a new section 21. If the non protection ever gets to court (not very likely), he may have to pay between x1 and x3 depending on the circumstances

[toys19]

so a new s21 is valid then if the deposit has been returned?

[MSaxp]

that is correct. others will confirm

[thesaint]

so a new s21 is valid then if the deposit has been returned?

If possible, get him to see if the tenants will agree to offset the deposit against the arrears.
If they will do this, make sure they put this in writing. He can then serve another Sec 21.

[westminster]

so a new s21 is valid then if the deposit has been returned?

Yes, see s.215(2A)(a) Housing Act 2004.

http://www.snorkerz.com/deposits_new.htm

[toys19]

Ok update, my mate has now discovered that his wife did protect the deposit, in july (4 month late) but defo did not give any info to tenant. How does this affect/change things?

My reading of it is that if he wants to issue s21 he needs to give deposit back anyway?

[MSaxp]

correct. if it ever got to a court with regards to deposit protection non compliance, it could look better for your friend and he could be looking at the lower end of the x1-x3 range.

section 21 advice above is unaffected

[toys19]

Ok thanks, as I thought.

[westminster]

MSaxp is right. The fact that LL protected the deposit 3 or 4 months late in July doesn't change anything. LL must still return the deposit if he wishes to serve a valid s.21 and LL is still exposed to a non-compliance claim.