UK Landlord Forum / Life

Good stuff!

I don't think we are trying to be complete arses, some of us have a genuine difference of opinion it seems... obviously folk get a bit frustrated when the other side (whichever side you are on) can't see the apparent logic of what you're saying.

Would be a boring world if we were all the same I guess. I would rather be a hammer than a nail though

Quote from: Sltj on March 20, 2015, 04:04:38 PM.
Not yet decided what to do in terms of my dilemma, no doubt at the weekend I will take my head out of the sand and give is some serious, professional, positive thought, as a responsible law abiding landlord should . <tongue in cheek>

I think you need to be offering 1x deposit as an offer, swiftly followed up by the deposit + 1x if that fails.  That's the bare minimum that should be awarded should a claim go through.  After that, I don't know, maybe see them in court and hope for the deposit + 1x.

Hi the deposit was returned more or less when they vacated as was another months rent that was inadvertently overpaid?

Quote from: Sltj on March 20, 2015, 04:04:38 PMNot yet decided what to do in terms of my dilemma, no doubt at the weekend I will take my head out of the sand and give is some serious, professional, positive thought, as a responsible law abiding landlord should . <tongue in cheek>

Did you decide on a plan of action over the weekend?

Quote from: Sltj on March 23, 2015, 10:57:10 AM
Hi the deposit was returned more or less when they vacated as was another months rent that was inadvertently overpaid?

Not sure I get this question.  The deposit was their money, the months rent overpaid was their money that you returned.

My suggestion was to try and nip this claim in the bud and avoid court action.

Quote from: Riptide on March 20, 2015, 06:05:16 PM


I think you need to be offering 1x deposit as an offer, swiftly followed up by the deposit + 1x if that fails.  That's the bare minimum that should be awarded should a claim go through.  After that, I don't know, maybe see them in court and hope for the deposit + 1x.

I thought you meant offer 1x then give them their deposit back. I just wanted to remind ppl that I returned the deposit ( I know it was their money that is why it was returned).

Quote from: Hippogriff on March 23, 2015, 11:39:38 AMDid you decide on a plan of action over the weekend?

Yes I have decided. I am going to make an open offer of 1.5x the original deposit value. I do not wish to waste the courts time. Offering 1 x is fair and no doubt that's all the tenants would be awarded. Offering 1.5x is more than fair and if refused I will then take my chances in court. If refused I Shall Refer to my offfer to the tenants and their refusal. Assuming the learned judge who woke up that morning in a lovely mood ( he did not kick the cat on the way out his house) sees that it was a genuine first time offence ( not a hanging one) he will only award 1x then, the tenants pay their own costs and mine!!!!!

Nope.  If they put a claim in they will get the deposit + 1x the deposit as a bare minimum.  This is the least amount that you will have to fork out at court (excluding costs).

I suggested you offer them the deposit amount now and when that is refused offer them twice as much again to settle.

Riptide - there is an obvious disconnect here.

If we assume the deposit originally held was £1,000, and leave out anything regarding costs.

That wasn't protected, but it has been returned in full - so the ex-Tenant has their £1,000 back.

Sltj believes that if the Court finds in favour of the ex-Tenant, at the minimum level, then the penalty would be the deposit + 1x - so £2,000 in total - and £1,000 has already been returned, so Sltj would end up sending the ex-Tenants another £1,000 - the 1x.

Sltj is actually planning to offer £1,500 - 1.5x the original deposit - so the ex-Tenant would end up with £1,000 + £1,500.

But you are writing that if it goes to Court then the minimum penalty would be equal to the deposit amount plus 1x - so another £2,000 - even if the original deposit of £1,000 has already been returned... so £1,000 returned, £1,000 + £1,000 penalty.

Surely the penalty is the 1x... the original deposit does't come into this as it has been returned? Can we resolve this disconnect?

I was always under the assumption that the penalty was the deposit amount (called the deposit) + 1-3 x that amount aswell.  I could be wrong as I don't know everything.

If the deposit was £1000 and there were £1000 damages (we'll say for arguments sake that the deposit was protected say 6 months late but a scheme was used) and it went through ADR and agreed that the LL could keep the £1000.

4 years later the T puts a claim in for non protection.  Are you trying to say the value of that claim would only be 1-3x as the original deposit has already been used for a valid reason.

My understanding is after seeking and receiving legal opinion, fundamentally where disputes have occurred and the deposit was not returned, the court can award 1-3 x plus the return of the deposit. Where the deposit has been given back to the tenant and the matter is referred to court, the penalty for non compliance is 1-3 X. The deposit has been returned and therefore does not enter into the argument other than to confirm what the value of 1x is I.e in your examples £1000

Quote from: Sltj on March 23, 2015, 02:18:48 PM
My understanding is after seeking and receiving legal opinion, fundamentally where disputes have occurred and the deposit was not returned, the court can award 1-3 x plus the return of the deposit. Where the deposit has been given back to the tenant and the matter is referred to court, the penalty for non compliance is 1-3 X. The deposit has been returned and therefore does not enter into the argument other than to confirm what the value of 1x is I.e in your examples £1000

I hope that is right as that would seem fairer.

Just have to try and work out how the 1-3 scale works now as there are so many permutations with deposit protection.

Protected on time no PI issued
Protected late no PI issued
Protected late PI Issued
Not protected at all

Quote from: Riptide on March 23, 2015, 02:04:43 PM4 years later the T puts a claim in for non protection.  Are you trying to say the value of that claim would only be 1-3x as the original deposit has already been used for a valid reason.

Yeah.

Possible penalty due Landlord is to a) return the deposit (surely assuming not already returned or willingly consumed for other purposes) and b) a penalty for not protecting it that is 1x to 3x.

The following extract is from the 2004 Housing Act CHAPTER 4   TENANCY DEPOSIT SCHEMES
As amended by the 2011 Localism ActE&O


(4)     The court must [ix] order the landlord to pay to the applicant a sum of money not less than the amount of the deposit and not more than

• three times the amount of the deposit within the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the making of the order.
  
  This applies to section 21s etc. I can't find the section that refers simply to penalties for non compliance, tenant left with no actual notice being served on them to vacate and deposit having been repaid? But assuming the above is correct following issuing notices to vacate etc , I read it as penalty (minimum) 1x, providing deposit has been returned?

What a lot of people have failed to mention here is COSTS.

There are now companies offering no win no fee on this, the legal fees can be up to £3k if the case goes on for a bit.

I had a client where the Lawyer came from far away and charged £863 travelling expenses and it was awarded on the costs.

Also if you failed to protect the deposit you also failed to serve the prescribed information, I have had clients pay 1x for each error and even then it was the Estate Agent that screwed up, but they were the ones that had to pay.

The OP needs to recognise this is just a cost of doing business, you are nuts to not take a deposit in future, take two months and follow the correct procedure.