Mungler Posted August 31, 2011 Report Share Posted August 31, 2011 Having skimmed this thread and the replies, I can honestly say that most are wrong or will land the OP in a massive pickle and possibly facing all sorts of grief and possibly a legal bill from the landlord's solicitors - issuing a statutory demand? Issue a letter before action and then a small claim - there's loads of tips and guidance from government websites. Question: if the landlord renewed your tenancy each year by issuing you with a "new" or "fresh" assured shorthold tenancy agreement (with new dates and periods entered etc) then that will probably be viewed as a fresh fixed term tenancy (for each period) and your landlord might be obliged to pay the deposit in. If he hasn't it could cost him... If your occupation has been based on an original tenancy agreement dated November 2006 which hasn't been touched, renewed or updated i.e. it's run beyond the initial fixed term and has continued as a rolling periodic tenancy then there is probably no obligation on the landlord to pay your deposit into an authorised deposit protection scheme. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harnser Posted August 31, 2011 Report Share Posted August 31, 2011 Thank god the brief came in . Harnser . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oscarsdad Posted August 31, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 31, 2011 Thanks all i have reduced the detail of the letter and posted it. Hopefully it will result in a cheque arriving soon! Anthony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fisherman Mike Posted August 31, 2011 Report Share Posted August 31, 2011 (edited) Did you deal directly with the landlord or a lettings agent when you first tennanted the property ? If the latter you should be pursuing the deposit through them initially, assuming they still control the let. Keep it cordial until you are absolutely confident he doesnt intend to return it. Edited August 31, 2011 by Fisherman Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted August 31, 2011 Report Share Posted August 31, 2011 Did you deal directly with the landlord or a lettings agent when you first tennanted the property ? If the latter you should be pursuing the deposit through them initially, assuming they still control the let. Keep it cordial until you are absolutely confident he doesnt intend to return it. Another corker! (Letting) agents acting for a disclosed principal (the Landlord). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fisherman Mike Posted August 31, 2011 Report Share Posted August 31, 2011 (edited) Another corker! (Letting) agents acting for a disclosed principal (the Landlord). Nevertheless some tennacy agreemnets contain caveats and terms that even the principal may not be aware of. It could possibly be an oversight. As I say give them the benefit of the doubt until you are confident of your position before you decide to expend legal fees you may never recover. I speak from experience as this happened to me before we bought our first house. The landlord wasnt even aware the agent was holding a deposit until I went around with my agreement and a bottle of Claret...My wife picked up a cheque for £250 from the agent the very next day... Like I said keep it cordial inless you really want to swell the coffers of another fat cat member of the Law Society Edited August 31, 2011 by Fisherman Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted August 31, 2011 Report Share Posted August 31, 2011 I mainly see landlords crying when letting agents (holding rent and deposits) go pop, and the landlord gets the bad news that because the tenant has paid rent to the landlord's authorised (letting) agent, that rent is as good as paid as far as the tenant is concerned notwithstanding that the landlord doesn't see a penny.... and followed up with the kicker that the landlord remains obligated to the tenant for the deposit which was taken and held by the agent. The classic is where a Limited Company letting agent appears to be proactive and helpful and volunteers the collection of the tenant's deposit (on behalf of the landlord) on the basis that the letting agent will submit the deposit into a deposit protection scheme and take care of the administration.... but of course the letting agent trousers it and the limited company goes pop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fisherman Mike Posted August 31, 2011 Report Share Posted August 31, 2011 I mainly see landlords crying when letting agents (holding rent and deposits) go pop, and the landlord gets the bad news that because the tenant has paid rent to the landlord's authorised (letting) agent, that rent is as good as paid as far as the tenant is concerned notwithstanding that the landlord doesn't see a penny.... and followed up with the kicker that the landlord remains obligated to the tenant for the deposit which was taken and held by the agent. The classic is where a Limited Company letting agent appears to be proactive and helpful and volunteers the collection of the tenant's deposit (on behalf of the landlord) on the basis that the letting agent will submit the deposit into a deposit protection scheme and take care of the administration.... but of course the letting agent trousers it and the limited company goes pop. Thats just dispicable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.