isn't this wrong?? re TDS

[Coastfodder]

Hello again,

Our Solicitor has contacted our landlord and pointedout her non compliance with the schemes and how we will be taking it further.They have also pointed out that the section21 notice given to us invalid because of her non compliance.

They have stated to her we will NOT be leaving on Thursday(27th March) but will be remaining untill the end of the tenancy(27th June 0.Her Solicitor received this via DX on 20th March.

Last night we had a letter through the Door from our Landlady stating that she has arranged for a independant inventary company to come here on Thursday at 3pm We are also to hand the keys over .She says if we do not let her know (via an email address)that this is ok we will be liable for cost.!!!

I sent her an Email(copying in all solicitors involved) saying we will not be leaving as perour Solicitors Letter.I told her to Contact her Solicitor and gave her all her Solicotrs details again.

I went onto her Solicitors website and found this about the Tenancy deposit Scheme

"There are two types of TDS and the Landlord must comply with one or the other, and notify the tenant with details of how the deposit is protected within 14 days of receiving the deposit. If the tenant does not receive notice within this timescale, an application can be made to Court to repay the deposit or pay it into a TDS. If this has not been done by the date of the Court hearing, the Landlord will be ordered to do so and will also be liable to pay to the tenant an amount equal to 3 times the amount of the initial deposit."

I thought and also i am sure my Solicitor has said ,that non compliance=3x the amount.But the wording says if it isn't sorted out by the Court date the she could be ordered to pay 3x the amount.She has not put it in a scheme and we already have letters from all 3 companies stating this.

So what do you think?

Many Thanks CF

[Steve__M]

Your first thread suggests to me that your contract started before TDS protection was applied. Therefore, the section 21 is valid and you may be liable to eviction.

You said you initialled another "contract" but you said you didn't have a copy yourself.

Keeping to the contract

If that is still the case then while what you say about the TDS sounds about right (there is some discussion as to whether you would get the 3x deposit if the deposit is protected late), but you may have a hard time proving the new contract exists.

[Coastfodder]

Thankyou very much for your reply.

We HAVE got a copyof the Contract as I explained in post 5 of the keeping to the contract thread.It is initialled by us and is signed and dated by our Landlady.She finally gave us it in OCT 07

We know she definately did get a copy of the letter from our Solicitor because within the Hour of it being DX to her Solicitors she had dissapeared.I really don't know what she is playing at.

And She still has not done the repairs..

I regulary take Videos of the Problems and the EH have been again and said they will now tell her she has to get it done.BUT they have also said they are lacking in funds so do not have the money to take her to court if she does not reply..GRRRRR

[Steve__M]

OK. The original thread was a bit confusing. You have a copy of the newer contract, but you said you haven't signed it, so arguably it is not a contract...? Presumably your solicitor has an opinion?

[Coastfodder]

yes,when I re read it I agree it was confusing..

Well the Solicitors accept it as a binding Tenancy.
In their view it is just the same as if we had signed an agreement each and then swopped..


CF

[Steve__M]

OK, but I recently provided my tenants with a new contract, and they took ages to sign it. I didn't protect the deposit until they'd signed it and sent it to me. Perhaps legally you're in the right because the landlady signed it whereas I didn't give my tenants a signed copy till I'd got their signed copy.

[Joa]

Contract can be created by actions of the parties, i.e. rent being paid in return for exclusive occupation. Signature or even written contract are secondary.
The fact that the contract was unsigned is irrelevant and as long as the rent is paid and the tenant can exclude the world and his wife from his or her home- the tenancy exists. Of course paperwork is helpful, but it is not essential.

[demon_x_slash]

The trouble is that if no contract existed the OP would have to convince a judge (in event of a claim) that the tenancy was renewed, and had not just lapsed into a periodic tenancy. According to our sticky on the subject, the TDS only applies to pre-April 2007 tenancies if a renewal actually occurs; a lapse into periodic wouldn't count.

Happily for the OP, though, s/he does have physical proof of renewal (or at the very least intention to create a renewal) and I therefore don't think there'll be a problem

[Joa]

Of course you are correct. My post was only referring to comments of previous posters who said, for example "You have a copy of the newer contract, but you said you haven't signed it, so arguably it is not a contract...?"

[Coastfodder]

Thankyou all for your replies.

Im still a little concerned about the wording of my original post..The Part that I have copied and pasted from a Solicitors website..

also we are having probelms trying to work out how much rent we would have to pay if we leave here on the 16th April.

We pay £900 pcm.we pay it on the 28th of each month.So how much do we have to pay and how do we work it out?

I would appreciate any help

[demon_x_slash]

We recently moved our rent date. The accounts lady calculated it thus: monthly rent x 12 (months) divided by 365 (days in a normal year) equals one day's rent.

So, for example: £900 x12 = 10800 /365 = £29.59 x16 = £473.43.

This was the method by which our agency calculated the extra we would have to pay. You would obviously need to confirm with their own accounts department as to how they usually do things.