Wow, you must be the only one in the Universe I've got teenagers and am still learning on the job. I gave one of my kids low self-esteem because I was demanding too high standards and another one, with whom I was then too slack, turned out as a brilliantly selfish charmer! Sorry for the hijack!

This leads me to believe that the woman did not live at the house. It means in turn that the the friend and the OP may have been "proper" tenants. The OP would have been a fully fledged tenant if he paid his rent directly to the landlady, but even if was subletting from a friend, the same protection would apply. "exclusive" in this context means "to the exclusion of others" - who are not entitled to the occupation, i.e. landlord, landlord's agents etc. So people do not have to be in any relationship to form a single household. As for the "man & wife" expression- it is kind of out-dated in age of civil partnerships, co-habiting couples and other house sharing arrangements.

I have to agree with andylondonuk; tenancy was created by landlord accepting rent payments and allowing possession. Therefore there is no doubt in my mind that TDS applies.

C'mon! Tim Parker it is then Thanks PI Guy.

Hi folks; from my previous experience of complaints, I know that it is only worth talking to Customer Services for a limited amunt of time and if the negotiation becomes pointless, then it is necessary to speak to the chief. I purchased AA membership. Went into a lot of trouble to make sure the DD day is the 25th day of the month. It was agreed in writing (exchange of emails). Lo and behold, they take payment on the 5th. I incurr £38 penalty charge from CrapWest because I am few quid short of the full requested payment- we all know how it goes. I want AA to refund me this £38 The Customer Services adviser from AA are distinctly unhelpful (wehey, this is a surprise) . The DD guarantee doesn't cover extra charges (it talks about refund of the "amount paid") - all in all I need to head to the top of the pile. Any ideas on who is their MD or CEO or whatever it's called? Cheers Very harassed Joa:mad:

Apologies to the OP for this highjack- but will DD guarantee provide for wrong date too or only for wrong amount?

I just imagined you with a steam whistle....I must say I smiled to myself, thank you, cause it is a grim day today and NatWest whacked a charge for being £3 short of a DD which should not have gone out today anyway. So your whistle has helped me As for the stickies- as you know Ed re-wrote most of them because I felt my languge skills were crap and they needed to be done pronto. But the info contained should be perfectly OK; checked and double checked. If anybody spots anything wrong, please let me or a Mod know asap as giving out incorrect advice is like a worse crime in advisers' handbook!

If you want him to refund you the money, it will be you who will need to prove in court that he owes you anything. Normally, it is the landlord's duty to justify withholding of all or part of your deposit. This is because it is clear from the tenancy agremeent or invoice or receipt that the deposit has been in fact paid by the tenant to the landlord. You don't seem to have much in a way of such evidence. Therefore unless you can provide other kind of evidence (witness, bank transfer, copy of a cheque from the bank)- the chances of court action being sucessful are very slim.

Does nobody read "stickies" anymore? This information has been prepared on basis of advice provided by Shelter ans I have made sure that none of it comes from the top of someone's head and all is properly checked out. BTW- That was not a rant but I feel one coming anyway, entitled "stickies- READ THEM BEFORE YOU POST, public dearesssssssst"

suzyalan; keep us updated but please get your friend prepared- a win would be fabulous but is quite unlikely. This is because all the evidence seems to be circumstantial and the judge can only decide on the evidence in front of him/her. The decision will be based on a balance of probabilities: whose story is more probable, based on available evidence (not on the type of a person someone is, not on the character assassination etc). But hey, do not give up hope all together - the judges sometimes are prone to peculiar and bizarre reasonings.

Hi kinkajou; I was wondering whether you've seen this thread: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/tenants/117572-unfair-deposit-deductions.html#post1188882 Additionally, in response to your questions: (1) yes, (2) as it is your money, the landlord should consult with you about how it is spent, unless the amounts are obvious, for example something that was agreed earlier. In reality however, landlords will often spend your money first and then inform you about it. And that's OK providing the expenditure is reasonable -no point arguing just for the sake of it. (3) if you've lived in a furnished property and paid to use it, you should never be asked to pay for "like for like" replacement. The replacement value is diminished by "wear and tear" of the items.

MTM- you are very sweet (as your nickname confirms) but change of plans would create a lot of complications. Shame though because your help would be ever so useful!

Giz, I love your seasonal avatar! And why would I want to meet a bunch of rebellious, trouble-making, righteously outraged, reclaim the right fanatics!?? Oh, wait...it's because I am one myself, hehehe

Giz, I am going on 15th

Guys, if the TDS sticky is wrong or misleading, we need to ask for a Mod to edit it. We must not allow for inaccurate info to sit up there. Can someone suggest appropriate amendment and contact Mods by clicking on the Report Post button .

shywazz- need to go with her really. The bf has to be "assessed" LOL The little chat, you know ; "if you hurt my daughter, I'll conduct a gender re-assignment on you ".... But you are right, in future the fly by night long distance romance can be helped by bmi!

mmmmm....what a wealth of advice! I especially love the fact that M has an airport! double duh!

I shall be travelling on M6 and the person I am meeting will need to be flexible (I am doing someone a great favour!- i.e. delivering my daughter to her boyfriend, as she wants to meet his friends! bloody taxi service! )

Renting from an ex-partner is a very complex issue. It is possible but there are few hoops to jump. These hoops are designed to show to the local authority that you are now living in a separate "households". I would suggest that you call Community Legal Advice on 0845 345 4 345 They would be able to advise you directly on your entitlement and the application process. At the same time, call your council and ask for HB application form or check whether your council has one to download. Sadly- nothing is going to happen by Wednesday; you can however apply to Social Fund (if you are in receipt of IS) to ask for a Crisis Loan {- ask CLA adviser about this too. You can download application here: Apply for a Crisis Loan (form SF401) : Directgov - Do it online Crisis Loan may help you in a tight spot but it may be difficult to prove that you are going to be kicked out. You may want to think carefully- would situation warrant a domestic violence angle (reembering that dv is not only about actual physical violence but emotional harassment and abuse too). I don't know- this needs proper advice session. With regards to your housing situation; if your landlady lives at the property and shares communal arreas with you (kitchen, bathroom, hallway)- you are not a tenant. Your rights are somewhat limited. You are a licensee. CLA adviser needs to know this too. You will probably need to make a homelessness application too- if your landlady is serious about getting you out.

Hi guys; I am traveling to M from London (Heathrow side), I am not a very confident driver and i am meeting a person in M who is not a driver at all and would need to use public transport to some place to meet me. What would be a good place for two dummies like this to meet? Cheers!

Aw, this is the mechanics of it. I get it. Antivirus thanks so much, but as yo can see- we are doing just fine here.

Oh, and another thing that is puzzling me: I get emailed updates about new posts on my threads. This is a second email about an entry posted by antivirus which is nowhere to be seen on the thread itself. This is the email: Dear Joa, antivirus has just replied to a thread you have subscribed to entitled - Thread title edited to remove commercial website details - in the Bailiffs forum of The Consumer Forums. This thread is located at: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bailiffs/121984-thread-title-edited-remove-new-post.html Here is the message that has just been posted: *************** The way i am seeing it at the moment. Why is chloe jane being allowed to attack tomtubby ? Just a question i wanted to ask as i could not sleep all night remaining curious. *************** There may be other replies also, but you will not receive any more notifications until you visit the forum again. All the best, The Consumer Forums End of email. What is happening to antivirus' posts?

I am not entirely happy that the discussion has moved so much away from the topic. The topic was ; there is a useful website out there which seems to be helpful if you are in a tight spot with bailiffs. I am disappointed that I cannot put up a link and I consider the censorship a little bit too restrictive but this is not my website so that's that. The rest is interesting but irrelevant, so could it be conducted somewhere please? Finally, I am so, so soooooo sick about calling everyone who has a different opinion a troll. This is such a lazy, catch-all attitude. For goodness sake, can't certain people see that calling someone a troll reflects rather badly on them- i.e. I am not able to have a reasonable discussion, the art of discourse is beyond me but I am not capable of raising above it and I enjoy goading this poster, so I know! I will call them a troll and watch the fun! Right, my little rant over.

The system did not fail Den- she was floored by the sheer lack of civic responsibility of primitive dog-owners, who not only allowed their dogs to run wild but went to court and lied about it. The judge was struggling for evidence (of the very incident- cat not only being attacked but attacked by the defendant's dog)- she had so little of it she felt she had no choice but to dismiss the case. She was careful to explain this in her summary. So Den did not loose and the neighbours did not win. They have been lucky and Lady Luck is not always fair.

I think it is very important to remember that the judge did not decide that the defendants were right or that you were wrong Den. She has decided that on a balance of probabilities, she could not agree that it was the defendant's dog who caused the injury. A lot in your case depended on personal statements; yours and the defendant's - there was no direct witnesses, beside you and your son. But you have conducted yourself brilliantly; you were calm, collected and dignified. You were well prepared - for a lay person, whilst we know what an almighty cock-up was caused by the defendant's solicitors (it was un-bloody-believable- the solicitors write a defence which basically destroyed defendant's case that they haven't got a dog! But sadly, the judge let it pass- as the case was not really about that). Whilst I understand judge's hesitation which made her unable to find for den, i feel that it was a very disappointing outcome - achieved by defendant's shocking lies, bare-faced dishonesty, breathtaking and shameless porkies. The judge opened by clarifying what she will deal with and what she will not. That meant that most of the witness statements, including huge chunks of Den's neighbour's statement were not considered. The judge then permitted documents which she did not see, which were submitted by the other party. She was very frustrated by the defendant's lack of preparedness, her solicitor's slackness- in my mind she has tried too hard to accommodate the defendant. Maybe she took one look at the gum-chewing, perpetually pregnant, hardly out of childhood herself, tracksuit clad , "innit" defendant and thought to herself: "disadvantaged person alert, better be extra nice, in case they torch my Lexus later on!" OK. Bygones. We have gained new knowledge which may help in making the life for the defendant that little bit more difficult.