PDA

View Full Version : Late protection of Deposit



swinefever
30-01-2008, 22:59 PM
Having renewed a tenancy back in Oct 07, i made a mistake in not protecting the existing deposit. I mistakenly thought that this only applied to new tenants, not tenancies as well. However, upon reading about the mistake a couple of weeks back, i put the deposit in the DPS scheme. I am now also drafting a written document to give to the tenant to inform them of the particulars of the scheme. I have two questions that follow from this:

1. Can the tenant still take court action against me, since the deposit was not protected within the 14 days (i'm assuming my ignorance of regulations won't help me in court)?

2. Does anyone have a link to/can provide, a template letter that i should send to the tenant to inform them of where and how their deposit is protected please? I could write one myself but would like to make sure i am covering the legislation properly.

Thanks,

Swine

pcwilkins
31-01-2008, 07:50 AM
1. Can the tenant still take court action against me, since the deposit was not protected within the 14 days

Yes.


(i'm assuming my ignorance of regulations won't help me in court)?

I think you're right.


2. Does anyone have a link to/can provide, a template letter that i should send to the tenant to inform them of where and how their deposit is protected please?

Can't provide a letter, but this link will tell you all the info that needs to be given to T: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2007/pdf/uksi_20070797_en.pdf


I could write one myself but would like to make sure i am covering the legislation properly.

No matter how you write it, you still aren't covering the legislation because it's too late. But hopefully T won't notice...

Peter

swinefever
31-01-2008, 08:23 AM
Hi Peter, thanks for your reply. From what i've read, in the first instance, the Court will either order the Landlord to repay the deposit or secure it within 14 days. Since the the Court will see that the deposit is now protected, surely they will be reasonable and not take further action?

pcwilkins
31-01-2008, 10:12 AM
Hi Peter, thanks for your reply. From what i've read, in the first instance, the Court will either order the Landlord to repay the deposit or secure it within 14 days. Since the the Court will see that the deposit is now protected, surely they will be reasonable and not take further action?

It's not possible to predict what the court will do. The law states that if the court is satisfied that the initial requirements were not complied with (i.e. if they are sure that you didn't protect deposit within 14 days) the penalties will be applied.

One penalty is that you will be forced to protect the deposit --- which you have already done, so no problem there. The other penalty, which you don't mention, is that you will be ordered to pay the tenant 3x deposit as a penalty.

If I were you I would be hoping that your tenant is also ignorant about the new laws...he probably is, most people seem to be. On the other hand he might be lurking on here, waiting until he wants to leave before he submits the court form!

Peter

JCUNNINGHAM
31-01-2008, 10:33 AM
Hi,

1.I have a similar question - a tenant paid me his deposit on Friday the 25th - is it 14 calendar days or business days from this date in which i have to register the deposit with one of the schemes.

2. How long does it take to register for either the deposit protection scheme or the insurance scheme?

3. Which one would you recommend?

4. What are people's view on the Oyez AST

pcwilkins
31-01-2008, 11:20 AM
is it 14 calendar days or business days from this date in which i have to register the deposit with one of the schemes.

The law says "14 days", so I assume calendar days.

Can't answer your other questions, sorry.

Peter

jeffrey
31-01-2008, 11:36 AM
What are people's view on the Oyez AST
I've not seen the most recent edition, but previous ones always seemed inadequately detailed and rather perfunctory. Yes, they're settled by Counsel; yes, they're legally binding; but no, they're not really sufficient for most cases unless you add a whole raft of riders.

temuri
28-05-2008, 00:33 AM
Please advise.

I became a landlord for the first time last summer and had not come across the Tenancy Deposit Scheme until now.

I now realise that I should have put the tenants' deposit into a scheme. The issue has only come to light as the tenants have now moved out and we have a disagreement on the deposit amount owed.

I'll have to face any punishment that comes my way (tenants can apply for a court order) due to my ignorance but can anyone advise if I have any options left?

I have, of course, now ensured that the new tenants' deposit is protected so have learnt from my mistake but just wondering if there's any way round with the previous tenants deposit?

Ericthelobster
28-05-2008, 07:03 AM
I now realise that I should have put the tenants' deposit into a scheme. The issue has only come to light as the tenants have now moved out and we have a disagreement on the deposit amount owed.

I'll have to face any punishment that comes my way (tenants can apply for a court order) due to my ignorance but can anyone advise if I have any options left?No, none. The "punishment" you face is a fine of 3x the deposit payable to the tenant, so your best bet is to stop disagreeing on deposit deductions now, and pay them a back in full in the hope that this will make them go away and not push for the fine.

Rothers
08-07-2008, 18:25 PM
Hi there my hubby and I are looking for some help!! We sold our house to the shopkeepers next door last november and agreed to rent back for 6 months til we found somewhere to buy. We paid £90.00 (they insisted) before comp of sale to put our deposit in the sol called deposit protection scheme. and two months rent upfront as a deposit. They took no photos of property as they said 'sold as seen'. When we gave the correct notice before the tenancy ended we were told the prop wld be inspected within 7 days and deposit wld be returned to us. However they decided to keep the money and said there were some repair issues, we which strongly disagree with and they are simply trying it on. My hubby then asked who are deposit was held with as the dispute should be resolved by them as that was what we were 'forced' to pay. Weeks later it emerged it was never paid into a scheme and they were still 'haggling' with our money!! , so we took a small claims against them (to our cost-again) and they then finally put it in a scheme which was free anyway- 3 months after we've moved out. We have just recieved their defence today and they are saying as they have now put in a scheme (they say: as long as its before the court hearing it doesnt matter) we are wasting theirs and the courts time!!!! What right have the LL and thier sols got to hold our money and decide how much we are getting back -if any?? Do we still have case to get our money and 3x the dpeosit back? We are not greedy people but are furious at being lied to and someone fraudulently taking £90.00 to do nothing with- plus keeping our deposit and trying to 'bargain unreasonably' Can anyone advise, sorry to go on!!!

jta
08-07-2008, 18:36 PM
There's an ongoing debate about this very point, The general opinion seems to be that you can take them to court and they will have to pay you 3x the deposit as a penalty for not complying with the legislation. I do not think that the fact? they have now paid it in will be much of a defence if you go for it. Look at all th other posts on this subject.
Good Luck

Rothers
08-07-2008, 19:24 PM
JTA thanks for taking the time to reply, we will not give up and as cliched as this sounds, just so they dont treat their next tennant the same, many thanks.

Bel
09-07-2008, 08:12 AM
If you need some letter writing inspiration, follow the link through on this post

http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=12264

They have failed you by not protecting the deposit within 14 days and not giving you any notification within 14 days. Show them you mean business. Good luck.

Rothers
09-07-2008, 16:57 PM
Thanks Bel. I read this link last night and it doesn't surprise me to hear that this guy has won his case as some LL's even when they know they've not followed 'the rules' still hound you for more money!! -why??? His story really gave us abit of hope when you have your wobbly moments of "are we doing the right thing?" I promise to keep all posted as to what the outcome is and if we 'encounter' any nasty surprises along the way, we want to help as many other people as possible!

LifeSucks
09-08-2008, 21:38 PM
My AST agreement says,

DEPOSIT A refundable deposit of £XXX is payable on singing this Agreement and held by the landlord as stakeholder

Is it a law that deposit must be protected? I have not heard anything from LL if he has protected the deposit or not.

porridge
09-08-2008, 22:11 PM
My AST agreement says,

DEPOSIT A refundable deposit of £XXX is payable on singing this Agreement and held by the landlord as stakeholder

Is it a law that deposit must be protected? I have not heard anything from LL if he has protected the deposit or not.

It is a must and he must inform you within 14 days

see below from the DPD website

As part of the Housing Act 2004 the Government is introducing tenancy deposit protection for all assured shorthold tenancies (ASTs) in England and Wales where a deposit is taken. From April 6th 2007, all deposits paid under an AST have had to be protected within 14 days of receipt by the landlord.

The legislation aims to ensure that tenants who have paid a deposit to a landlord or letting agent and are entitled to receive all or part of it back at the end of that tenancy, actually get it.

Paul_f
10-08-2008, 09:47 AM
My AST agreement says,

DEPOSIT A refundable deposit of £XXX is payable on singing this Agreement and held by the landlord as stakeholder

Was the cost of this a "tenor"?

LifeSucks
10-08-2008, 14:57 PM
Was the cost of this a "tenor"?

Sorry, I did not get that?

Subway
10-08-2008, 15:07 PM
Sorry, I did not get that?

erm singing?

(took me a while too ;))

HRNorthernlass
27-02-2009, 10:00 AM
I took on a new T last year and didn't realise just how important the tenancy deposit scheme seems to be. Yes I will write out 100 times "I will not be such a numpty when it comes to organising the tenancy!"

I've just paid the deposit amount into a scheme but am now worried that because it was paid in late the T will turn around and claim 3 months rent.

Can the T do this, now the deposit is in a scheme?

Perplexed
27-02-2009, 10:04 AM
I took on a new T last year and didn't realise just how important the tenancy deposit scheme seems to be. Yes I will write out 100 times "I will not be such a numpty when it comes to organising the tenancy!"

I've just paid the deposit amount into a scheme but am now worried that because it was paid in late the T will turn around and claim 3 months rent.

Can the T do this, now the deposit is in a scheme?

Does the tenant know about the delay?

Have you given the tenant ALL the prescribed information?

HRNorthernlass
27-02-2009, 10:09 AM
The T will know when all the info gets sent to them as I believe I'm required to do... like I say all this is new to me and happening as we type.

Perplexed
27-02-2009, 10:43 AM
The T will know when all the info gets sent to them as I believe I'm required to do... like I say all this is new to me and happening as we type.

That's not ALL the information T must be provided with.

There is more you must provide yourself.

See here: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2007/uksi_20070797_en_1

Poppy
27-02-2009, 10:53 AM
You have done the right thing by placing the money in a scheme. The prescribed information will be emailed to you or be available online through your membership of your chosen scheme. Get it to your tenants without further delay.

The tenant has no reason to sue you now that you have protected the deposit.

Perplexed
27-02-2009, 11:00 AM
You have done the right thing by placing the money in a scheme. The prescribed information will be emailed to you or be available online through your membership of your chosen scheme. Get it to your tenants without further delay.

The tenant has no reason to sue you now that you have protected the deposit.

WRONG!

What scheme administrators provide is only part of the prescribed information.

The rest must be provided by the LL.

More details already provided in my post above. Just follow the link given there.

HRNorthernlass
27-02-2009, 11:06 AM
The T's reason to sue me would be to get hold of money! So yes I'm still worried that they can and might do so. They are regularly behind with their rent payments and I have reason to believe that they will run up as big a bill as they can get away with :-(

I will have a look at the links and paperwork provided by the scheme I used and will make sure the T gets all the relevant info that they are supposed to get... it feels as if I'm offering them a loaded gun.

Mars Mug
27-02-2009, 11:11 AM
There are other threads on this forum, relatively recent, where evidence of the deposit being placed in a scheme has been accepted in court even though late, and the 3x fine has not been granted.

HRNorthernlass
27-02-2009, 11:13 AM
The same T know's that I would have liked him to leave at the end of his 6 months AST he and I verbally agreed and arranged a day that he would move out but when I arrived he said that he'd changed his mind. Does this mean that he is now on a Periodic Tenancy and that I don't have to hold his deposit in a scheme anymore?

I'm not sure whether to start a s21 or to try to use an s8 to get him to move out. He regularly doesn't pay his rent and is 2 months behind but I would hate to turn up in court for him to suddenly pay a small amount and a judge to say that was evidence of him trying to pay and to let the T stay.

I just want the T gone.

jeffrey
27-02-2009, 11:16 AM
The same T know's that I would have liked him to leave at the end of his 6 months AST he and I verbally agreed and arranged a day that he would move out but when I arrived he said that he'd changed his mind. Does this mean that he is now on a Periodic Tenancy and that I don't have to hold his deposit in a scheme anymore?
Yes (the fixed-term AST has now become periodic); but it's still an AST (so the deposit is still protectable).

Poppy
27-02-2009, 11:17 AM
Perplexed, what is missing from the "information for tenants" document and the deposit protection certificate provided by mydeposits?

HRNorthernlass
27-02-2009, 11:21 AM
Thank you Mars Mug
some consolation.

I've been letting for 20 yrs but only ever had one other bad tenant. I know I should count myself lucky and put this one down to experience but it hurts. I've only once ever had to keep a part of a deposit back and that was for a vacuum cleaner that eventually turned up and I handed the money over at once.
It's annoying to have to get to grips with a system that seems to be in place because of greedy LLs.
OK Grumble over.

I'll get on with sorting this out.... Thanks to all the posters who've offered help and advice.


There are other threads on this forum, relatively recent, where evidence of the deposit being placed in a scheme has been accepted in court even though late, and the 3x fine has not been granted.

HRNorthernlass
27-02-2009, 11:23 AM
I think what is missing is the information such as addresses that you fill in on the template they provide.




Perplexed, what is missing from the "information for tenants" document and the deposit protection certificate provided by mydeposits?

HRNorthernlass
27-02-2009, 11:26 AM
Thank you for that advice.


(Goes off to look for a bullet proof vest)


Yes (the fixed-term AST has now become periodic); but it's still an AST (so the deposit is still protectable).

Poppy
27-02-2009, 11:31 AM
What address? Is there something missing from your documents?

jeffrey
27-02-2009, 11:32 AM
(Goes off to look for a bullet proof vest)
Much better to wear a bulletproof jacket; why let bullet penetrate top layers of clothing and hope that it stops short at the innermost?

HRNorthernlass
27-02-2009, 11:59 AM
...because wearing protection as an outer layer might give the T reason to think about why I consider protection neccessary... causing him to go looking for weapon... much rather "keep it close to my chest" beisdes... it goes better with my outfit!



Much better to wear a bulletproof jacket; why let bullet penetrate top layers of clothing and hope that it stops short at the innermost?

:D

jeffrey
27-02-2009, 12:07 PM
You realise, of course, that bulletproof vest uses 'vest' in the American sense (= 'jacket')? Our 'vest' is their 'undershirt'!

Perplexed
27-02-2009, 13:39 PM
Perplexed, what is missing from the "information for tenants" document and the deposit protection certificate provided by mydeposits?

What's missing varies depending on the scheme.

If you use The Dispute Service (who force you to use a special TA incorporating all the info) then nothing should be missing, but if youuse the other two other info must be supplied by LL.

See especially 2.-(1) (g) (vi) and (vii) here: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2007/uksi_20070797_en_1

Perplexed
27-02-2009, 13:48 PM
More specifically about mydeposits, information on what is missing is BURIED DEEP in their literature. But if you look at the bottom of p. 5 of their 'Landlords Overview' document, you will read:


Further information that is also required by the Act, and that should be proveded by You, is detailed below.

If you don't believe me, go and read it.

I personally find it very unhelpful that they should have buried this crucial piece of information deep inside their literature, but that's precisely what they've done. This is particularly bad as other parts their literature lull the LL into a false sense of security by implying the scheme administrators are providing all the necessary information for the tenant!

Perplexed
27-02-2009, 14:03 PM
You realise, of course, that bulletproof vest uses 'vest' in the American sense (= 'jacket')? Our 'vest' is their 'undershirt'!

Yep, they do do things differently across the pond, don't they?!

For instance, they write "Jeffrey" instead "Geoffrey." :D

agent46
27-02-2009, 15:06 PM
You realise, of course, that bulletproof vest uses 'vest' in the American sense (= 'jacket')? Our 'vest' is their 'undershirt'!

I disagree. Ask any traditional tailor to describe a "vest", and they will tell you about a garment that most people would call a "waistcoat". I and a number of my sartorially aware friends can have long conversations about how many buttons a jacket cuff should have, or whether a signet ring should be worn on the right or left hand, so, believe it or not, this rather arcane subject does crop up in conversation every now and again, particularly as I also happen to favour 3-piece suits. My tailor rebukes me if I accidentally use the term "waistcoat" instead of "vest", so don't get me started on this subject! BTW, just for reference the bottom button of a vest should never be fastened.

http://www.newstatesman.com/200204150018

So much as it irks me to say it, when the Americans say "bulletproof vest", they are using the word in its proper sense.

Perplexed
27-02-2009, 15:28 PM
LL's using the DPS scheme can download a specially prepared template from here:

https://www.depositprotection.com/Public/DocumentLibrary/AgentInfo.aspx


In addition to protecting Deposits within fourteen days of receipt, Landlords/ Lettings Agents must ensure that they comply with The Housing (Tenancy Deposits) (Prescribed Information) Order 2007.

The DPS cannot do this for Landlords, but have produced a Prescribed Information template [pdf file] for information purposes only.

You can use this document as a template but it is your responsibility to ensure that it is correctly completed and served on the Tenant(s) within fourteen days of receiving the Deposit. You must ensure that you give the Tenant(s) an opportunity to sign the Prescribed Information by way of confirmation that its contents are correct.