Tenancy Deposit Scheme

[Resoli]

I believe the technical term is... bugger! Sheffield is my County Court too!

Hmm... I'm tempted to try the argument that a deposit protected late with TDS / mydeposits.co.uk outside the 14 days is in breach of the scheme rules, which in turn is a breach of the initial requirements.

[butty_a]

That ruling still tends to agree with what pipps was saying though, the money had been protected but he failed to notify the tennant. common sense prevailing there i think because it was protected after all. If the money had not been protected i think the out come would have been different because a failure to notify and a failure to protect are two completely different things, one creates a little unease for the tennant the other potentailly creates a big head ache come kicking out time. I think the ruling goes with the spirit of the law as it was intended to be. we are fighting the banks for ripping us off for what are in some cases slight mistakes of miss managing our money by a few pounds, lets not get into the frame of mind of screwing over landlords for what is more than likely a slip of the mind by forgetting to give you a certificate but for those who dont protect the money then they should feel the full force of the law to encourage the rogues out there to stop trying to turn us over.

[Joa]

I am not sure what's happening here with regards to the applications under s.214, so I thought I'll post this just in case. I have not had time to pop in here at all recently but whole libel case ( bloody ridiculous) has brought me back.

One more thing- despite the clear recommendations below, I have so far been using N1 for my clients. Never had any comments or challenges about it from the courts.

taken from http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/d...pplication.doc

Tenancy Deposit Protection – Housing Act 2004

County court applications under section 214 of the Act


Background
1. Landlords and agents are required to protect their tenants’ deposits under a scheme set out by the Housing Act 2004 (“the Act”) .

2. Under these provisions, the landlord or agent is required to place any deposit into an approved tenancy deposit scheme (“TDS”) within 14 days of receipt. The landlord is also required to provide the tenant with confirmation that the deposit has been put into a TDS.

3. Where a landlord fails to do this, a tenant may apply to the county court to compel the landlord to repay the deposit or place it in an approved TDS (see section 214 of the Act).

“Section 214” application to the county court
4. The application under section 214 can only be made on limited grounds. If the court is satisfied that those grounds have been met, the court must either order the repayment of the deposit or order the person who appears to be holding the deposit to pay it into a designated account under a authorised custodial tenancy deposit scheme. The court must also order the landlord to pay a sum of money equal to three times the amount of the deposit.

CPR Part 8 procedure
5. The appropriate procedure for starting a “section 214 claim” is provided by Part 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR). A tenant will therefore need to follow the procedure set out in Part 8 of the CPR and the accompanying Practice Direction and pay the appropriate court fees in accordance with The Civil Proceedings Fees Order 2008 (if not exempt). Details about the correct claim form to be used (Form N208 ), the contents of the claim form and filing of evidence in support of the claim, and also the procedure to be followed by the defendant landlords are set out in this part of the CPR – for more details see footnote .

6. Detailed guidance on completing Form N208 and subsequent action to be taken by the defendant landlord is also set out in the relevant forms as attached below (also available in hard copy from any county court office):
• Part 8 Claim Form (N208 ) http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/c.../n208_1000.pdf
• Notes for Claimants (Form N208A) http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/c...n208a_0499.pdf
• Notes to Defendants (Form N208C) http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/c...n208c_1202.pdf

7. To avoid any confusion, Part 56 of the CPR will be shortly be amended to state that section 214 applications must be started using the Part 8 procedure.

Disputes after deposit is placed in a TDS
8. Please note that this guidance is only aimed at resolving disputes about placing a deposit into a TDS. It is not aimed at resolving disputes about the return of a deposit that has been placed in a TDS – e.g. at the end of the tenancy. Each TDS scheme is supported by a free alternative dispute resolution (ADR) service whose role is to resolve such disputes about the return of a deposit that has been in a TDS. Use of the scheme’s ADR service is not compulsory but their purpose is to avoid such disputes reaching the courts.

9. If however parties to such disputes do decide to use the courts to resolve these particular matters, they are advised to seek separate advice about appropriate court procedures that may be available.

Further Help and Advice
10. There are other HMCS leaflets available from the HMCS website Her Majesty's Courts Service - Home or county court offices which are designed to help claimants and defendants, but they can only give a general idea of what is likely to happen. Court staff can advise on court procedures and provide the forms needed and help to fill them in, but they cannot give legal advice.

11. Free legal advice may be available from Citizens Advice Bureaux, law centres or independent advice agencies. Contact details can be found in the local phone directory and details may be displayed in local courts. Alternatively, contact Community Legal Advice on 0845 345 4345 or their website at Community Legal Advice

[MrShed]

Welcome back joa !!

[callumsgran]

Aye welcome back hunni, we sure have missed ya!

[dotStored]

I've recently moved out, and the landlord without consulting us has decided to spend £2500 of the £2700 deposit on cleaning, painting etc which in our opinion was not necessary. Any thoughts? Looks like we are going to have to use to ADR scheme which isn't an exciting prospect!
Thanks for your help

[Mr Pipps]

Here's an update for the the scoreboard.

A withheld tenancy deposit of £1,012.50, which had originally not been protected under a Tenancy Deposit Scheme, was immediately repaid following the initial claim some 12 months ago.

In the County Court today, a TDS penalty of £3,037.50 was ordered to be paid to the claimant within 14 days. Costs of £118 were also awarded.

So you see, that's the difference that a litigant in person can make, when they're also legally trained!

And so to all the rumour-mongers, naysayers, patronising corwards, and the great legally ignorant of this forum - who all insisted on so sagely offering their irrelevant and erroneous comments on a matter which they clearly do not understand - I would like to wish you all the very best in your own respective cases. It sounds like you'll need it.

The score so far: Honest tenants 'one', rogue landlords 'nil'.

[help me kick his butt]

Hi Mr Pipps, I would really like the details of this case as I think it is always good to see cases won by tenants.
I am one of the above mentioned legally ignorant, but am trying to learn as much as I can from this site and solicitors. I have indeed found alot of the comments on here very helpful.
May I ask why you sound so angry?
Regards

[callumsgran]

I think he's a bit peed off with those that have brought up the case where the tenant got the wrong judge and lost their case

[Mr Pipps]

I am not at all angry! Whatever possibly gave you that idea? I've just won £3,000 in legal system prize-draw! I couldn't be happier!

Why have I expressed a little old fashioned indignance, and chosen to rub it in a little? Well, take a look at posts 33 through to 62, and you might begin to see what I mean. I think that some people need their faces to be rubbed in it a little, in order to learn. You, sir, were certainly not included.

You see, there is a big difference between being legally ignorant and knowing it, and being legally ignorant and yet think that you're an expert just because you've 'seen a thing or two' in 'your time'. Some of the posts on this thread by suposed 'experts' so far, have been farcical, and of no help to this forum or the public awareness of the law whatsoever.

Finally, Callumsgran, I don't believe there's any such thing as a 'wrong Judge'. Only a wrong claimant. Hence, my post.

[help me kick his butt]

Fair enough, I only hope my case goes aswell, Did you have a lawyer?
Could I possibly ask more about the case?
By the way, Im a madam not a Sir x

[help me kick his butt]

On reading more of your posts, am I right to presume you are a lawyer?

[callumsgran]

Finally, Callumsgran, I don't believe there's any such thing as a 'wrong Judge'. Only a wrong claimant. Hence, my post.




Sorry mr.pipps i was going by whoever it was that said that that judge made a mistake but luckily didnt set a precedent

[Mr Pipps]

No probs, Callumsgran.

I feel it's important to remember, however, that District Judges are not infallible. Nor are they usually very well prepared or informed.

They usually spend a disproportionate amount of time trying to get their heads around the most basic facts, before then relying on something they heard about in a broadly similar case sometime before.

However, if a claimant would like a Judge to actually make a correct ruling, as mine did, especially in a new and potentially controversial area of law, then the claimant must be prepared to gently and politely hold the Judge's hand and guide them slowly to the right answer using a detailed statement of case and a robust adherence to the legislation.

A District Judge is very much like a computer or a calculator: "Rubbish in = rubbish out."

That's why I won, other's haven't, and many more don't even seem to be willing to try.

[callumsgran]

I see your point

You will stick around to help us wont you?

[Mr Pipps]

That's very kind of you to say.

Though for anyone who might seek assistance in their own case, I would recommend they make their own discreet enquiries to whoever they think might be able to point them in the right direction.

As I've already mentioned in this thread, I cannot, and will not, provide free legal advice on a public forum.

And as you have probably already seen for yourself, the majority of free advice that is so publicly distributed by 'the experts', is usually useless nonsense.

If you are an intending claimant who believes you are in the right, and you are serious about investing time and energy in your case, then you should seek an initial opinion on your likelihood of success based on the precise material facts of your case. I would not recommend that you pursue specific legal answers from strangers on a public forum.

[help me kick his butt]

Hi Again, Mr Pipps, did the fact that you are no longer a tenant come up?
Did you "pay" your deposit before April 2007?
I think these might be my stumbling blocks