This is my lba LETTER BEFORE ACTION Further to my email dated 26 April 2010 please find enclosed a copy of court form N208. This relates to the landlords’ failure to comply with section 213(4) or section 213(6)(a) of The Housing Act 2004 in relation to the tenancy deposit of £625 taken for the accommodation at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. This form will be submitted to the county court at xxxxxxxxxxx on the 31st May 2010 without further notice if the deposit has not been repaid to us in full before that date. You will note that section 214 of The Housing Act 2004 states that if the court is satisfied that the statutory requirements have not been complied with in relation to the deposit then not only must the court order the person who appears to the court to be holding the deposit to repay it to the applicant, but it must also order the landlord to pay to the applicant a sum of money equal to three times the amount of the deposit. We will therefore be making a claim for £2,674.34 including court fees and interest on the original deposit if we do not receive settlement within 10 working days.

Hi can someone check to see if I've missed anything here please? Sending lba with copy of N208. Tenancy ended, unprotected deposit not returned. Hopefully LL will see sense and return deposit before the claim for 3x is lodged and avoid additional costs. This is what I've put on the claim form: The claimants are making a landlord and tenant claim - Civil Procedure Rules Part 56.1(f). To comply with CPR Practice Direction 56 2.1 the claimants are using the Part 8 Procedure. The claim is being made under section 214 (1)(a) of The Housing Act 2004. The claimants are the former assured shorthold tenants of the property known as xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and the defendants are the landlords. The joint tenancy agreement was dated xxxxxxxxx 2009 and a copy is attached to this claim form. The claimants paid the defendants a tenancy deposit of £625 on xxxxxxxxx 2009. A copy of the receipt is attached to this claim. The defendants did not comply with section 213 (4) or section 213(6)(a) of the Housing Act 2004 in relation to the deposit. The tenancy ended on xxxxxxxxxx 2010 and the deposit was not refunded. The claimants are not aware of any reason why the defendants should legally be allowed to keep the deposit. The claimants have been denied the opportunity to use an alternative dispute resolution service to resolve their dispute with the landlords because the defendants did not comply with the requirements of section 213 of The Housing Act 2004 to protect the deposit with an authorised scheme. The claimants apply for an order under section 214 (3)(a) Housing Act 2004 that the person who appears to the court to be holding the deposit must repay it to the claimants within 14 days from the date of the order. The claimants also apply for an order under section 214 (4) of The Housing Act 2004 that the defendants must also pay the claimants a sum of money equal to three times the amount of the deposit within 14 days from the date of the order. The claimants are therefore asking the court to make an order for the sum of £2500, being the total of the deposit of £625 plus an amount equivalent to three times the deposit. The claimants also claim interest on the original deposit under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year, from xxxxxx 2009 (being the day after the last day on which the deposit should have been protected under section 213 (3) of The Housing Act 2004) to xxxxxx 2010 of £24.34. The claimants also claim interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £0.14. The claimants also claim costs. Hopefully there will be no need to file this if the LL responds to the lba and just pays the deposit back as requested.

On the same thread, anyone got any suggestions where I go from here? Default registered by Lowells 2005. Sent "prove it" letter to Buchanan Clark & Wells back in Nov. Got a reply back in Dec saying clients would forward the information requested. Heard nothing until last month when Red started chasing for money again, coincidentally? after I had been refused mortgages. Have had 2 letters in last 2 weeks and they have ignored my email telling them lowell are fully aware the account is in dispute. Also offered to pay "as a gesture of goodwill" if they agreed in writing to remove the dispute, but no response - just another automated "Red" letter chasing the debt. Have been very complacent up until now cos I "thought" I had a "good" credit score. Dfferent matter now I've been refused mortgages and might lose my house! Should i complain to OFT cos they haven't sent any evidence and are still chasing it? Many thanks Helen

meant to say doesnt really matter what your actual credit score is. My experian score was 900, which ordinarily would be considered a good (almost excellent) score. But once the potential lenders saw that red default - that was it, even though it was only for £17, my excellent payment record with everyone else counted for nothing! Helen

Even 1 default is badddd news! My credit score was 900 with a default for a mobile phone bill of £17 (disputed). After passing initial credit checks with flying colours I was refused a mortgage with both Abbey National and Birmingham Midshires because of this 1 default. My advice would be to get it removed asap. Helen

Thank you. OC? - original creditor? forgive me I'm a newbie. Will ask Lowells for copy of my agreement and final bill. I did ask Buchanan Clark + Wells for a copy of the final bill from T-mobile when they phoned me earlier in the week, but they told me they couldn't provide it cos it was a bought debt!!! Hence the prove it letter. Not had any correspondence/conversation at all with Lowells but didn't know about the default on my file until I checked it after the call from BCW. Have gone through the DD's on my statement and was paying t-mobile from Jan 04 to Dec 04. It was a 12 month u-fix contract of £13.99 a month and he dropped the phone down the toilet early in Nov 04 rendering it useless. Had no joy with the insurance (which I was paying separately) so I cancelled the contract after I'd paid the 12th month, phone hadn't been usable for over a month by this time. Default on my credit file says started 23/02/05 defaulted 10/08/05 and was updated on 23/02/08, which must be not long after I got the letter asking me if I wanted to buy the debt back. From the dates given, and the amount of £17 I assume that i must have billed for Jan and part of Feb after cancelling my DD but don't have any recollection of this.

Hi have sent the "prove it" letter to BCW who are chasing me on behalf of Lowells for an alleged unsettled t-mobile bill for £17. Just checked my experian report though and have found a default on there from Lowells for "communications" debt saying started 23/02/05, defaulted 10/08/05. Can they do this when I've never had an agreement with them? Definitely never had any correspondence from Lowells until this year when I got a letter giving me the opportunity to buy the supposed debt from them, which I ignored cos I thought it was just a [problem] letter and didn't know what they were talking about. Is there a way to get this default removed? I've looked in the templates and found surlybonds letter but assuming can't use this as not a cca. Any advice gratefully received as looking to move house next year and could do without this mucking up my chances of a mortgage. The rest of my file is fine, 20+ existing or settled accounts all showing as satisfactory. Thanks, Helen

OK ta will do that today.

Thank u. Will try that and see what happens. Can they add money on though if I don't pay?

Hi I received a phone call today from a lady at bcw about a formal demand they'd sent me for £17.13 the pursuer is Lowell portfolio and the creditor is t-mobile. I stated that I did not accept the debt, my son had t-mobile phone bout 3/4 years ago which was in my name and cancelled when the phone broke. The lady said that this was prob the final bill from the 14 day notice period which I maintained had been paid. I asked for proof that I owe this money and she said she couldn't give me any cos it was a bought debt but they were a reputable co and wouldn't pursue a debt that didn't exist! Conversation then got a bit heated with her saying I had to pay, was on my file would accrue interest blah blah, and affect my credit rating. I responded that credit rating fine thanks very much, and not paying anythin without proof I owe it first. She ended up puttin phone down on me during shouting match. Hubby thinks I should just pay as only £17 but I worried they might add extra charges if I acknowlege it. What do you peeps think? Thanx