Does L/lord HAVE to join those new deposit schemes???

[DSM]

When we moved in, end of April, I could have sworn that our l/lord showed us some leaflets and said, 'the govt has introduced these new schemes and I am going to put your deposit into one of these schemes... I will be writing to you about it all.'

We have now received a letter which says that my landlord is not subscribing to the "Deposit Protection Scheme" and would like to refund a proportion of our deposit every month until April. We pay our rent at the end of the month in full and he deposits a £100 a few days later. In the end he will only be holding about £500 of our deposit.

My concerns

1) sounds too good to be true (for me anyway)
2) can a landlord opt out of the Deposit scheme?
3) what's the catch?

If anyone understands this area, please get in touch.

Yours truly

[MrShed]

1) If the landlord is daft enough to do it, let him!
2) No - he must do it. What was the exact date of your moving in?

[Ed999]

The golden rule is NEVER look a gift horse in the mouth.

As to your question, if the tenancy was created after the date the law changed then the new deposit scheme is compulsory. It is a legal requirement.

Accordingly, if the deposit was paid on or after 6 April 2007 it is automatically subject to the tenancy deposit scheme - see http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...important.html

From 6 April 2007, all deposits (for rent up to £25,000 per annum) taken by landlords and letting agents for Assured Shorthold Tenancies in England and Wales, must be protected by a tenancy deposit protection scheme: Tenancy Deposit : Directgov

[rogerebaker]

Hes probably keeping you sweet.

If you push the issue and take him to county court and he has to prove he has secured it in a scheme. If he hasnt secured the deposit he has to pay you three times the deposit in compensation thats not a may or at the discretion of the court its a MUST.

[DSM]

Originally Posted by rogerebaker

If you push the issue and take him to county court and he has to prove he has secured it in a scheme. If he hasnt secured the deposit he has to pay you three times the deposit in compensation thats not a may or at the discretion of the court its a MUST.

The thing is he has owned up in his letter to us. He has not put our money in a scheme and uses 'we will not be subscribing to ...'. I have the proof in black and white. Now that I know what I know, if I sign his letter, am I helping him to break the law? What are the implications of not getting him to place our money in a scheme if say we argue the inventory at the end of the contract?

Oh and Mr Shed, we moved on the 29th of April. Thanks so much for your help.

[Planner]

TDS isnt optional. I wouldnt be signing any letter.

Your choices are simple;

- You taking the LL to court now for not putting your deposit in a scheme, and the judge will award your costs and order him to put it in a scheme.

- You wait until the end of the AST, and take your LL to court for not putting your deposit in a scheme, and the jusge will award your costs and x3 your deposit.

- You will until the end of the AST and recieve your deposit back from the LL and let the matter drop.

As you are now 'aware' that the LL hasnt put your depsoit in tds I think you maybe obliged to take some action.

Remember he wont beable to issue a section 21 on you.