UK Landlord Forum / Life

Hi everyone,

I let my house out on a 12 month AST in London where rent increase at renewal was linked to the LHA. Tenant refused the new rent so we decided to give them another year at the current rent on the basis that after the new AST comes to an end they would move out. I protected the deposit late for the first contact (new landlord not knowing what they are doing). For the second term unprotected it in time and issued the documents to the tenant which they refused to accept by registered post, I have proof of this's for needed.

My question is- can issue a S21 without returning the deposit as the deposit was secured in time for the second tenancy or does it relate to the first one?

( Also worth mentioning is after we agreed the second contract they then sent me a hand written note saying they didn't want to go ahead with the contract. We asked them to sign a deed of surrender which they refused to do so are still living there as the second contract is still valid)

Many thanks in advance.

Baby mum

Be wary of advice received from a blog (particularly my own)
Always do your own research

(22 views and no replies)...
Ok here is a view but your post is not very coherent so I will make some assumptions....

1. The first tenancy started post 2012(?) if so then the tenant can make a claim pursuant to the Housing Act 2004 for up to three times the value of the deposit for failing to serve the prescribed information.  Hopefully they don't figure this out but they do have six years to make a claim.

2. Was the second tenancy was effected by signing a completely new AST(?) in which case the deposit now applies to the second tenancy (you should have re-served the prescribed information again). You should have also informed the Deposit Protection agency, but that is less critical. 

3. I don't understand what you mean by you unprotected it in time(?)

4.  The fact the tenant refused to accept is possibly your issue however it depends on how you are expected to serve notices pursuant to your tenancy agreement, arguably if you sent it Signed For and the post office returned it then you may technically have failed to serve notice, but let's assume that technicality isn't discovered and you can prove you did serve the PI then you do not need to return the deposit to serve the Section 21.

5. You say that after the second agreement was "agreed", do you mean executed?  If so then the Notice to Quit which they served is invalid as it seems it was served in this fixed period so the second tenancy is extant and remains in force.

Hope that's clear enough.

Best of luck.