Getting deposit back

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

    Getting deposit back

    Who can the tenant claim the deposit back from in the situation where=

    -tenant has signed a fixed term (AST) lease
    -deposit was protected under a registered scheme by L1's agent
    -During the fixed term, the property is sold to L2
    -without tenant's knowledge, the protection is listed as ended on the scheme website (assume L1/L2 notified, but tenant not informed. Fixed term not yet expired.)
    -L2's agent hasn't reprotected the deposit as far as we are aware.

    It's substantial amount. Thanks!

    #2
    The current landlord when the tenancy ends. When a ll takes over from a previous ll he 'steps into the shoes' of the previous ll.

    Comment


      #3
      Thanks. Can the current landlord claim it back from the first?

      Comment


        #4
        If it has ended, then someone has cancelled it. This would normally need the tenant and LL to allow the money to be released so not sure what is going on here! That is in the case of a custodial scheme anyway.

        Comment


          #5
          The parties to the sale of the property should have dealt with this as a part of the sale. The deposit is the tenants money and he is entitled to have it returned from the person who is landlord at the end of the tenancy, less any agreed deductions. If it was a custodial scheme it cannot have been released to the landlord without the consent of the tenant, so I'm guessing this is an insurance scheme. Who are you in this situation (tenant, landlord, agent, etc.)?

          Comment


            #6
            Is this part of a possible scam that i seem to be hearing more of where the deposit is put into the isured scheme. Once the tenancy is over the LL then becomes very difficult to trace, to the point where the tenant gives up. Eventually the LL keeps the money. I have not been involved with the insured scheme, so not sure how the money is repayed and whether the deposit scheme needs both parties to fulfill the obligation of paying it back.

            I know this sounds a crazy theory and I might be looking into this too deep, but i have more than once come across tenants that just cannot get their deposit back because the LL will not make contact. Often foreigners who are going back home after the tenancy has finished and have no idea how it works!

            Comment


              #7
              We have been in this situation as LL2. On completion there should have been a transfer of deposit from L1 to L2, T notified who the new LL is and the new deposit protected. Keeping the L1 tenancy agreement running would not be a problem as long as the T is notified of the change. As mentioned above L2 steps into the shoes of L1 but this does not protect him from protecting the deposit.

              This is my own experience and we were let down by our solicitor who simply sent us an email stating that she does not specialise in this area. Despite us making it clear in writing we wanted to acquire a property with a sitting tenant!

              Goss
              Long suffering Landlord.

              Comment


                #8
                Assuming legalbeagle you represent tenant I would start with LBAs to both landlords & agent then start court action against all 3.

                AFAIK there has yet to be a test case for liability of new landlord - it could be you!
                I am legally unqualified: If you need to rely on advice check it with a suitable authority - eg a solicitor specialising in landlord/tenant law...

                Comment


                  #9
                  Deposit was registered with an insurance-backed scheme.

                  This confused me - I understood deposits cannot be transferred to L2 under insurance scheme. Perhaps this is why it was ended early, but the money was neither returned to T or re-protected, and the fixed term has not expired! Unfortunately it also means ADR through the scheme is not an option.

                  theartfuldodger - I think you could be right about the law being wooly on this one.

                  amazondean - don't think this is a scam, but speaking of tracing, T only has a name for L2!

                  Thanks all.

                  Comment

                  Latest Activity

                  Collapse

                  Working...
                  X