PDA

View Full Version : Deposit not added to DPS



k33wud
17-02-2010, 18:39 PM
My letting agent went bust and took my deposit, therefore the landlord was liable. We came to an agreement where he would take £75 a month for 11 months out of rent aside for deposit. Making up 825

I rang landlord to give notice on 17th December and he said that he would take the rent from 1-17th Jan from deposit and then sort me out the rest of the cash, I AGREED

However i rang him to ask when i could receive the cash and he was saying that he didnt think i wanted any back and that notice should be served from start of the month etc, He also changed the cupboards which cost him money (i didnt break them)

In the end he said he could give me like £200 but was on his arse and needed time for the cash.

This is the intersting bit (for some)......

I signed a new tenancy in October 2008 and the landlord HASNT put my bond i into the DPS which i believe is LAW.

Ive been on direct.gov website and they claim I can receive 3 times my deposit.

IS this right? especially given that i gave notice in the middle of a month etc?

westminster
18-02-2010, 13:10 PM
I signed a new tenancy in October 2008 and the landlord HASNT put my bond i into the DPS which i believe is LAW.

Ive been on direct.gov website and they claim I can receive 3 times my deposit.

IS this right? especially given that i gave notice in the middle of a month etc?
It's not as straightforward as the direct.gov website makes it sound.

Can you answer a few questions...
1. Was the rental property in England/Wales?
2. Was the rent less than £2,083.33 per month.
3. What were the dates of the last fixed term agreement, i.e. start date and end date?
4. What date did you move out?
5. How much of the deposit do you believe is still owed to you (i.e. £825 minus the monthly rent reduction payments and the rent for 1-17 Jan)?

k33wud
18-02-2010, 13:54 PM
Can you answer a few questions...

1. Was the rental property in England/Wales? Yes England

2. Was the rent less than £2,083.33 per month? Yes £625 a month

3. What were the dates of the last fixed term agreement, i.e. start date and end date? First tenancy with letting agent was 2nd April 2007 (4 days out of new DPS scheme) this ran for 6 months then was a rolling month by month. New tenancy with Landlord started in November 2008 (11 mths of £75 per month for bond, he wrote on the contract that if i wanted to leave early then i would receive the amount of months paid x £75)

4. What date did you move out? I gave notice on 17th December to which he said by last day was 17th January but I moved out 28th December

5. How much of the deposit do you believe is still owed to you (i.e. £825 minus the monthly rent reduction payments and the rent for 1-17 Jan)? I would assume he'd take £350 for rent which is fine and if he took a little for cleaning then I would think £400 is fair. He stated he had to change the cupboard doors but they weren't broken PLUS he changed the lock on the property after I moved out so didn't have access till 17th Jan

----

On another note, I havent been inside the property since moving out, he hasn't cleared off the inventory and the only contact we've had is two phone calls.

I moved out because a new housemate moved in and he couldn't afford to pay and as it was in my name I decided to move out, the landlord agreed to this lad moving in and said a new tenancy would be made up this was in Sept 2009. A new tenancy never came.

westminster
18-02-2010, 15:19 PM
I'm still confused about the deposit.


My letting agent went bust and took my deposit, therefore the landlord was liable. We came to an agreement where he would take £75 a month for 11 months out of rent aside for deposit. Making up 825
I thought by this that you meant LL knew he was still liable for returning your deposit, so he agreed to pay it back to you by reducing your rent by £75 per month for 11 months? (as opposed to returning it as a lump sum at the end of the tenancy).



he wrote on the contract that if i wanted to leave early then i would receive the amount of months paid x £75
Now I'm wondering whether you mean that you paid the normal rent. In which case why even talk of £75 installments or whatever they were - it makes no sense. You didn't have to pay the deposit again, and you weren't anyway if you were paying the normal rent. :confused:

Also, please confirm the start and end dates of the last fixed term tenancy, the one which began in October or November 2008 (e.g. 1 year term, began on [5th October 2008], ended on [4th October 2009]). This is relevant to how much rent you were liable for at the end of the tenancy.

k33wud
18-02-2010, 15:33 PM
Sorry for not being clear.

We always paid £625 rent. Rather then reduce the rent the landlord stated that the letting agent only paid him £550 therefore he would take our remaining £75 (we started paying him direct) and put that away for a bond once it reached £825. He would then keep that bond and pay it back at the end of the tenancy.

I don't have the full details to hand however our first term started 2nd April 2007 on a 6 month contract which then turned to a rolling contract month by month this was void when the letting agent went bust.

We started paying the landlord direct on 2nd October 2008 therefore i'd assume the tenancy was 2nd October 2008 to 1st November 2009.

The contract (i think) then turned to a rolling month by month tenancy.

However a new tennant moved in so a new tenancy should have been drawn up but never happened.

I hope this makes sense. It's all very complicated anyway.

westminster
18-02-2010, 19:06 PM
Sorry for not being clear.

We always paid £625 rent. Rather then reduce the rent the landlord stated that the letting agent only paid him £550 therefore he would take our remaining £75 (we started paying him direct) and put that away for a bond once it reached £825. He would then keep that bond and pay it back at the end of the tenancy.
This is absurd. Because the LL is implying you had to re-pay the deposit, which you didn't. Just because the agent went bust doesn't mean that the LL has no liability to return the deposit to you.


I don't have the full details to hand however our first term started 2nd April 2007 on a 6 month contract which then turned to a rolling contract month by month this was void when the letting agent went bust.
This contract was not made void by the letting agent going bust, because your contract was with the LL not the letting agent.


We started paying the landlord direct on 2nd October 2008 therefore i'd assume the tenancy was 2nd October 2008 to 1st November 2009.

The contract (i think) then turned to a rolling month by month tenancy.
Was there or wasn't there a new written tenancy agreement as from 2nd October 2008? Assumptions aren't enough.

If there wasn't a new written contract, or you've lost it, then you don't have a case to claim for non-compliance with deposit protection.

If there was a new written contract, with a term of 13 months, commencing 2nd October 2008, and ending 1st November 2009, then it was a rolling monthly contract (a.k.a. statutory periodic tenancy) when you gave notice on 17th December. In a periodic tenancy, notice must expire at the end of a rental period - in this case, the periods would run 2nd - 1st of the month, so your notice should have expired on the first of the month, and give at least one month's notice.

This means the earliest your notice given on 17th December 2009 could expire is 1st February 2010. In other words, you are legally liable for rent up to this date, regardless of when you moved out. Arguably, however, your LL, in only demanding rent up to 17th Jan, accepted an earlier surrender, so you might be okay - though he does seem to be dimly aware that notice should have ended on the 1st of the month.

You may or may not have a case for claiming for non compliance with deposit protection. If there was a new written contract and you have a copy of it, it would be highly advisable to seek legal advice, as such claims are allocated to the multi-track, court fees are high and you are exposed to the defendant's legal costs. See
http://blog.painsmith.co.uk/2009/05/21/proper-place-for-tds-claims/
The penalty is not 'automatic' and the statute is open to interpretation - different judges take different views. The LL may defeat the claim by returning the balance of the deposit to you, for example. Worst case scenario, you could claim and end up spending £1000+ on court fees, then have to pay for the LL's legal costs. That's why you need legal advice first.

Aside from the deposit compliance issue, you could still make a county court claim against the LL for return of the balance of the deposit - £425. You can do this using Money Claim Online. Bear in mind, however, that the LL may defend this by counterclaiming for rent up to 1st February (18th Jan - 1st Feb is 15 days = £308), so there's a chance you might only be awarded just over £100 in the end, after a lot of hassle pursuing the claim.

k33wud
19-02-2010, 13:31 PM
Thanks for all your help.

Yes a new tenancy was drawn up in October which I have at home.

I guess this is all a mess and I will speak to a solicitor and find out where I stand. In the mean time i'll play nice with the landlord and see what he will give me back

westminster
19-02-2010, 14:54 PM
Thanks for all your help.

Yes a new tenancy was drawn up in October which I have at home.

I guess this is all a mess and I will speak to a solicitor and find out where I stand. In the mean time i'll play nice with the landlord and see what he will give me back

It's not a mess. The situation is pretty straightforward.

On the one hand, LL held your deposit of £825 and is obliged to return it to you less any valid deductions. He was also obliged to protect the deposit and did not. A non-compliance claim would be for the unreturned portion (£425) plus 3x penalty, i.e. 4x £425, however, it may not be worth the risk of making such a claim.

On the other hand, depending on the actual dates of the last fixed term tenancy, you may be liable for more rent in lieu of notice, so it may also not be worth making a claim for the unreturned portion of the deposit only.

It is your choice as to whether to pursue either of these claims, or whether to walk away.

k33wud
24-02-2010, 13:55 PM
It's not a mess. The situation is pretty straightforward.

On the one hand, LL held your deposit of £825 and is obliged to return it to you less any valid deductions. He was also obliged to protect the deposit and did not. A non-compliance claim would be for the unreturned portion (£425) plus 3x penalty, i.e. 4x £425, however, it may not be worth the risk of making such a claim.

On the other hand, depending on the actual dates of the last fixed term tenancy, you may be liable for more rent in lieu of notice, so it may also not be worth making a claim for the unreturned portion of the deposit only.

It is your choice as to whether to pursue either of these claims, or whether to walk away.

I have spoken to the Citizens Advice Bureau who have advised me to send them a letter. They actually believe that the landlord is in the wrong. Apparently as my first tenancy was with the landlord too (which the letting agent 'apparently' lost) I can claim for that too.

All sounds quite complicated and by the sounds of it I have a massive case.

I will write a letter to the landlord and see what response I get.