Landlord Wont Give Back Bond

[jec]

Hi, new to this particular thread, but have used forum sucessfully to sue NatWest.

Anyway, I write on behalf of my daughter.

She recently finished her degree at Cardiff Uni. She rented a room in the same house for two years. She left owing no outstanding monies and I personally cleaned her room impecably. Her landlord, refuses to give back her 250.00 bond because she was late paying her rent twice. Can anyone advise.

Jec

[barracad]

Please can you clarify - when you say she was late paying her rent, I assume you mean that all rent has now in fact been paid up, and the deposit isn't being held because rent is still outstanding?

If so, the landlord has no right whatsoever to withold the deposit or any part of it as a charge for 'late payments' or similar.

[Jeanjaquessmoothie]

I'd get the landlord to put it in writing the exact reasons for with holding the bond. If it's due to late payment of rent that has now been paid, he's got no legal standing what so ever.

As said above, could you provide further details.

[MrShed]

Agree 100% with JJS, no legal basis for this being withheld IF it is due to late rent not outstanding rent.

[jec]

Hi,
As said she left no outstanding monies. She has paid everything up to date. She was late but always paid before the month's end - she was a uni student after all, he must have gotten that from many other students.
She has threatened leagl action, but he replied 'bring it on'. He owns the lettting agency. He has given back the bond to the other 5 flat mates.

[MrShed]

Proceed with legal action then. Its a complete no brainer this one.

[Planner]

Theres you answer then, you need "to bring it on".

Write a letter asking for a reason as to why deposit is witheld, if no reason other than the one hes already mentioned then you would like the deposit returning in 14 days.

If this isnt successful, then a letter before (LBA) action giving a further 14 days and then you will submitt a claim to the county court (fill in the N1 claim form and send it along with your LBA).

When that 14 days up, you "bring it on" and submit the claim.

Out of interest, you say the LL is also the letting agents, are they members of any professional organistaion by any chance? or one of the unis 'registered landlords'? if so I would suggest a compalint to them in addition to the above court action.

[jec]

The LL is a letting agent, but he also let thru 4let, which is the co. that my daughter has a contract with.

Ok phoned letting agent number and told them we had a copy oth the contract and they appear to be breaking the law. The girl would not help until I told her I had contacted Cardiff Trading Standards and the NUS and would be pursuing a legal claim, when she backed down a little. She would not give an address to me for the rogue B*****d but will give it to my daughter tommorrow when she goes to see them. She did not like the mention of trading standards and said she would do all she could to settle the matter and she herself on behalf of 4let.co.uk do not recommend his behaviour. It would appear that he has parted ways with them and they no longer represent him.
Will post when I get further info.

Cheers Jec

[jec]

Bit more info if it helps. As I said she let thru 4let.co.uk Cardiff. But half way thru the last year, Rehman the landlord ceased using them and took the money himself in cash each month and refused to issue receipts. The kids did not sign a new contract. 4let did not inform them of any change to the contract, 4let did not tell them that they were no longer the agents. Infact only the LL verbally did. So I take it as - the original contract being the only one - is the leagal and binding one. Am I correct? And if so, 4let are legally culpable?? Please advise. And if so do we issue legal proceedings with them????????????????(4let .co.uk)

Jec

[MrShed]

The contract has always been with the landlord, therefore it was and is the landlord that is legally culpable NOT 4let.

[jec]

Originally Posted by MrShed

The contract has always been with the landlord, therefore it was and is the landlord that is legally culpable NOT 4let.

Are u sure, only 4let are on the contract not Rehman, in fact it does not mention him it clearly states the the co;ntract is with 4let only as agents.

[MrShed]

4let acts as the landlords agent. In a legal sense, this means that they are one and the same person.

[jec]

Originally Posted by MrShed

4let acts as the landlords agent. In a legal sense, this means that they are one and the same person.

Hi shed,

OK so do we issue legal proceedings with 4let? named as agents.

[MrShed]

No, with the landlord.

[jec]

Originally Posted by MrShed

No, with the landlord.

Cheers Mr Shed,

Will try to get address for LL, btw what legally are the letting agents responsible for when you sign a contract with them only??

Cheers Jec

[MrShed]

In respect to yourself, nothing. It is ENTIRELY the landlord. However, the landlord can in turn then seek legal recourse against the agent.

Basically the chain works like this:

Tenant -> Landlord -> Agent - where the arrow means "is contracted with".

[jec]

Originally Posted by MrShed

In respect to yourself, nothing. It is ENTIRELY the landlord. However, the landlord can in turn then seek legal recourse against the agent.

Basically the chain works like this:

Tenant -> Landlord -> Agent - where the arrow means "is contracted with".

Thank you Sir,

Very interesting. The only reason why my daughter and her fellow students went with 4let was because they were afraid of being 'burnt'. 4let was a registered agency and therefore they thought this afforded them safety against the likes of the rogue landlords out there. So for future info all of our children going to uni be advised a reputable letting agency means SQUAT - you are still at the mercy of theives like Rahmen, your signed contract with the letting agency is worthless. Why then do we have contracts ant tandc's?????????????????? ????????????????????????? ???????????????