Lead tenant - do I need to protect flatmate (permitted occupier)'s deposit?

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

    Lead tenant - do I need to protect flatmate (permitted occupier)'s deposit?

    Hello!

    I am the lead tenant in a two bed flat: I am the one who signed the AST and paid the whole of the damage deposit (which is in a protected scheme).

    With the agreement of the landlord I had two flatmates - a couple - and I took a deposit of one month's rent from them when they moved in. They were *not* tenants - they were permitted occupiers. We all signed a legal agreement but this was nothing to do with the landlord - it was a private agreement between us.

    What I'm wondering is: was I supposed to protect their deposit? There is a potential dispute brewing in which *noone* is going to find in their favour. But I'm just wondering if I can get into trouble for not protecting their deposit.

    Thanks in advance for your help!

    #2
    Tenancy deposit protection does not apply to lodgers deposits

    http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?26192-Renting-a-room-Does-deposit-protection-scheme-apply

    And you can still deduct for damages from the deposit without
    hassle.

    R.a.M.

    Comment


      #3
      As ram says, you are fine. Deposit Protection in England/Wales only applies to assured shorthold tenancies and as you correctly point out, these people don't even have a tenancy let alone an AST.

      The only possible exception (and even then, it's not a killer) is if you used AST documentation that specifically states the deposit will be protected. If that is the case, then you are in breach of contact but I can't see any way in which the section 214 penalties could be used against you.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by Snorkerz View Post
        If that is the case, then you are in breach of contact but I can't see any way in which the section 214 penalties could be used against you.
        Indeed, HA 2004 would not apply and so neither would s.214 penalties.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Snorkerz View Post
          The only possible exception (and even then, it's not a killer) is if you used AST documentation that specifically states the deposit will be protected. If that is the case, then you are in breach of contact but I can't see any way in which the section 214 penalties could be used against you.
          If the contract did specify that the LL will protect the deposit, it would make no difference whatsoever whether the contract was headed 'AST' or 'Lodger Agreement' etc.

          Comment


            #6
            Many thanks guys. As it turns out, the previous flatmates and I seem to have settled our differences without need for the courts. But it's good to know this for the current flatmate - I had read somewhere that if you don't insure someone's deposit then the courts can award three times the deposit against you so was a bit worried about that.

            Cheers!

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by westminster View Post
              If the contract did specify that the LL will protect the deposit, it would make no difference whatsoever whether the contract was headed 'AST' or 'Lodger Agreement' etc.
              Whilst you are, of course, totally right, I was working on the basis that a published/downloaded lodger agreement wouldn't have that commitment in it whereas ASTs increasingly do.

              Comment

              Latest Activity

              Collapse

              Working...
              X