Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Wrongly convicted Horizon victims in Scotland to be exonerated NEWS.STV.TV Victims who faced wrongful convictions are to be exonerated the day after Royal Assent is granted.  
    • If anybody has any advice here, it would be greatly appreciated, I already suffer with pre-existing disabilities & have struggled with this so far. 
    • so return of goods order etc etc read upload  scan pages to jpg, redact in mspaint. the convert to and merge to one mass PDF  read upload and use the online listed sites for all 3 stages. do you want to keep the car? i will guess this was a manual paper claimform direct from the co.court or was it org sent from salford bulk processing and has just got reaq ssigned?      
    • Speaking of the reformatory boys, here they are with all of their supporters, some of whom traveled with them from miles away, all carefully crammed together and photographed to look like there were more than about 80 .. rather like Farages last rally with even fewer people crammed around what looked like an ice cream van or mobile tea bar ... Although a number in the crowd apparently thought they were at a vintage car rally as they appeared to be chanting 'crank-her'. A vintage Bentley must be out of view.   Is this all there is? Its less than the Tory candidate. - shut up and smile while they get a camera angle that looks better
    • in order for us to help you we require the following information:- Which Court have you received the claim from ? Canterbury Name of the Claimant ? Moneybarn No 1   How many defendant's  joint or self ? One Date of issue –  29/05/24 Acknowledged by 14/06/24  Defence by 29/06/24  Particulars of Claim PARTICULARS OF CLAIM 1.  By a Conditional Sale Agreement in writing made on 25th August 2022. Between the Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant let to the Defendant on Conditional Sale. A Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi (200 P S) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200cc (Sep.2015) Registration No, ******* Chassis number ***************** (“The Vehicle”).  A copy of the agreement is attached  2.  The price of the goods was £15,995.00. The Initial Rental was £8500.00.  The total charge for credit was £3575.;17 And the balance of £11,070.17 was payable by 59 equal consecutive monthly instalments of £187 63. payable on the 25th of each month. 3.  The following were expressed conditions of the set agreement, Clause 8: Our Right to End this Agreement  8.1   Subject to sending you the notice as required by law, any of the following events will entitle us to end this Agreement: 8.1.2  You fail to pay the advance payment (if any) or any of the payments as specified on the front page of this agreement or any other sum payable under this Agreement. 8.1.3 If any of the information you have given us before entering into this Agreement or during the term of this Agreement was false 8.1.4 We consider, acting reasonably, that the goods may be in jeopardy or that our rights in the goods may otherwise be prejudiced. 8.1.5 If you die 8.1.6 If a bankruptcy petition is presented against you; if you petition for your own bankruptcy, or make a live arrangement with your creditors or call a meeting of them. 8. 1.7 If in Scotland, you become insolvent or sequestration or a receiver, judicial factor or trustee to be appointed over any of your estate, or effects or suffer an arrestment, charge attachment or other diligence to be issued or levied on any of your estate or effects or suffer any exercise, or threatened exercise of landlords hype hypothec 8.1.8 If you are a partnership, you are dissolved 8.1.9 If the goods are destroyed, lost, stolen and/or treated by the insurer as a total loss in response to an insurance claim. 8.1.10 If we reasonably believe any payment made to us in respect of this Agreement is a proceed of crime. 8.1.11 If steps are taken by us to terminate any other agreement which you have entered into with us. Clause 9.  Effect of Us Terminating Agreement 9.1 If this Agreement terminates under clause 8 the following will apply 9.1.1 Subject to the rights given to you by law, you will no longer be entitled to possession of the goods and must return them to us to an address as we may reasonably specify, (removing or commencing the removal of any cherished plates) together with a V5 registration certificate, both sets of keys and a service record book. If you are unable or unwilling to return the goods to us then we shall collect the goods and we'll charge you in accordance with clause 10.3 9.1.2 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you for all payments and all other sums do under this agreement at the date of termination 9.1.3 We will sell the goods or public sale at the earliest opportunity once the goods are in a reasonable condition which includes a return of the items listed in clause 7.1.4 9.1.4 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you of the rest of the Total Amount Payable under this agreement less: ( a) A rebate for early settlement ias required by law which will be calculated and notified to you at the time of payment (b) The proceeds of sale of the goods (if any) after deduction of all costs associated with finding you and/or the goods, recovery, refurbishment and repair. Insurance, storage, sale, agents fees, cherished plate removal, replacement keys, costs associated with obtaining service history for the goods and in relation to obtaining a duplicate V5 registration certificate 4, The following are particulars required by Civil Procedure Rules. Rule 7.9 as set out in 7.1 and 7.2 of the associated Practice Direction entitled Hire Purchase Claims:- a)     The agreement is dated 25 August 2022. And is between Moneybarn No1 Limited  and xxxxxxxxx under agreement  number xxxxxx. b)    The claimant was one of the original parties to the agreement. c)    The agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. d)    The goods claimed Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi ( 200 PS) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200 cc (Sep2015} Registration No ^^^^^^^ Chassis number ***************** e)     The total price of the goods £19570 f)     The paid up sum £1206 5 g)    The unpaid balance of the total price £7505 (to include charges) h)    A default notice was sent to the defendant on 20th February 2024 by First class post i)      The date when the right to demand delivery of the goods accrued 14 March 2024 j)      The amount if any claimed as an alternative to delivery of the goods 7505 22 include charges 5.  At the date of service of the notice the instalments were £562.89 in arrears. 6. By reason of the Termination of the Agreement by the notice, defendant became liable to pay the sum of £7502 7. The date of maturity the agreement is 24th August 2027. 8. Further or alternative by reasons of  the Defendant breaches of the agreement by failing to pay the said instalments, the Defendant evinced an intention no longer to be bound by the Agreement and repudiated it by the said Notice the claimant accepted that repudiation 9. By reason of such repudiation the claimant has suffered loss and damage. Total amount payable £19570 Less sum paid or in arrears by the date of repudiation £12064 97 Balance £7505 (to include charges.) ( The claimant will give credit if necessary for the value of the vehicle if recovered.)  The claimant therefore claims 1.    An order for delivery up of the vehicle 2.    The MoneyClaim to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore,  Upon restoration of the MoneyClaim following return or loss of the vehicle. the Claimant will ensure the pre action protocol for debt claims is followed. 3.    Pursuant to s 90 (1)  of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. An order that the Claimant and/or its agents may enter any premises in which the vehicle is situated in order to recover the vehicle should it not be returned by the Defendant 4.    further or alternatively damages 5.    costs Statement of truth The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. The Claimant understands that the proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made a false statement in the document for verified by statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. I am duly Authorised by the Claimant to sign these Particulars of Claim signed Dated 17th of April 2024  What is the total value of the claim? 7502   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Never heard of this   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? No   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After  Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In a garage  Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes  Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Original Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? n/a   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? They said sent but nor received   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? None seen   Why did you cease payments? Still Paying,   What was the date of your last payment? Yesterday  31st May 2024   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes on 12 Feb 2024   What you need to do now.   Can't scan, will do via another means as you cant have jpg  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

TDS non compliance - suing Landlord


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4160 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

You will be issued with a CCJ, but there is NO RECORD of it kept at all as long as it is paid immediately. This also obviously wont take effect unless you lost the counterclaim, which I cant see happening personally...

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I am hand delivering my Part 8 claim on Monday to my local court accompanied with cheque for £150.

 

What should I include with the Part 8 claim?

 

Tennancy agreement copy?

All correspondance between me and LL asking for TDS number etc after moving out though she highlights damage to flat?

Emails for the TDS schemes confirming deposits not protected?

 

Anything else? Am i right in thinking i should send a copy of all documents i will give to the court to my ex LL?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi,

 

Funny enough I received a response from the court today having filed a Part 8 claim as per the advice and help on these forums. I am rather baffled by the courts response.

 

"Upon the courts own motion. The court has made this order of its own initiative without a hearing. If you object to the order, you must make an application to have it set aside, varied or stayed within 7 days of receiving it.

 

Upon referral of this matter to the District Judge

 

IT IS ORDERED THAT

 

All parties to file and serve Allocation Questionnaire within 21 days of service of this order together with draft directions agreed if possible in the attached form."

 

A fee of £200 is payable by the claimant on the filing of their allocation questionnaire. The defendant has filed a defence, a copy is enclosed with this notice (nothing was included though other than the questionnaire!?)

 

--------------------------

 

Any advice on this as it appears I have to pay £200 and go down a route that I have not read about anywhere on these forums or on the web based on a part 8 claim. I don't have legal representation and only have the 7 days to respond if i am to have it set aside, varied or stayed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gosh, I dont know, I find it all equally baffling!!!

Can you phone the court and ask them what this means.

Im seeing a solicitor this afternoon, re my TDS case. If I get time at the end of my consultation, I will ask for you.

Im sure someone far more knowledgable will be along soon to give you some advice.

Please note, my advice is only my opinion.

If you have found my advice helpful, please tip my scales, thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Allocation Questionnaire doesn't apply to part 8 claims. In the civil procedure rules 8.9© "the claim shall be treated as allocated to the multi-track and therefore Part 26 does not apply". However, in the civil procedure rules 8.1(3): "The court may at any stage order the claim to continue as if the claimant had not used the Part 8 procedure and, if it does so, the court may give any directions it considers appropriate."

 

Maybe the judge decided to change the claim from part 8 to part 7. Or simply the judge made a mistake.

 

I agree with help me kick his butt, you'd better call the court to make it clear.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have spoken to the court and my employer's solicitor. The court has promised to post me the defendant's evidence as they failed to include it in the request to complete the allocation questionnaire. Having spoken to a solicitor they strongly thought the correct way was to go via the Part 7 route and not Part 8 which I filed, therefore they thought the judge most likely ordered it take the Part 7/N1 route (therefore requiring an allocation questionnaire). I asked the court if this was the case but told me I had to write to the judge as they could not comment.

 

The allocation questionnaire provided is an N151 which the solicitor told me was the wrong one for claiming a fixed sum as an N151 allows the judge to award monies as they see fit. I put in a fixed claim of 3 x deposit plus original deposit therefore should have been sent a N149 which is a fixed claim amount. As a result the allocation questionnaire for N151 costs £200 as it's not a fixed sum claim under N149 where the cost is £35.

 

With the cost of filing a hearing £150, allocation questionnaire currently going to cost £200 and a hearing fee £300 I am seriously considering dropping this claim as that's £650 in costs I could potentially lose which i simply cannot afford.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

My case is still ongoing but has recently substantially progressed. Having questioned the judge on why it was not being treated by a part 8 claim and experiencing some quite frankly shocking administration by clerks (not having a clue about anything and given different messages by different people)....

 

I have received a letter stating that the judge has concluded the defendant has no defence to the claimants claim (after the defendant wrote an 8 page letter highlighting supposed damage and stress caused to their life, fatally admitting to not putting the money into the scheme). Unless the defendant puts in a counter claim within 7 days and pay the court fees, for the alleged damage, for which they have no receipts the judge will make an order against them. I am really glad I stuck to my insticts and the encouragement I received on here. Whilst nothing is a given yet, I am hopeful I will win the case but guess only time will tell. I anticipate a counter claim which will only complicate things....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I am pretty sure it is a Part 8 claim now as I originally filed, but as I said the court admin has not been good! Having written to the judge the message given back to me was that I no longer needed to file an allocation questionnaire. The legal advice I was given was that Part 8 claims were not subject to allocation questionnaires. The case must be pretty clear cut if the judge has decided there is no defence without even going to a hearing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

lefont, great read.

 

I hope things re going well.

 

I am in a similar situation. Is there any chance we can see your particulars of claim?

 

Also, is it only me, but I have moved out of my rented flat and same old story - landlord said it needed cleaning. So I checked things out and tried to contest it only to find they hadn't protected the deposit. I have sent an LBA giving 14 days.

 

All this talk about the landlord protecting the deposit after the tenancy and before the application date/court case is rubbish is it not?

 

If i can get proof in writing - which will be here in the next 2 days, from all three Deposit Protection Schemes that it was not lodged with them, then this means it was impossible that the landlord could even provide me with the prescribed infromation in the 14 days he/she should have done by law, which is a closed case for the compensation claim?

 

Thanks, Neo

If you find this post useful, please click the Scales of 'Justice' in the top right corner. Thanks ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

All this talk about the landlord protecting the deposit after the tenancy and before the application date/court case is rubbish is it not?

Rubbish or not, this aspect is one where the legislation, as written, is shown to be poorly drafted (from a tenant point of view).

 

It's a great get out for landlords, and if they can protect late and then use the fact that it is protected now as a defence normally means that they can avoid having to refund the tenants court fee as well.

 

In litigation, as in horse racing, there is no such thing as a sure bet. On a share dealing site I use, it says only buy shares with money you can afford to lose. I would say that this also applies to litigation.

On some things I am very knowledgeable, on other things I am stupid. Trouble is, sometimes I discover that the former is the latter or vice versa, and I don't know this until later - maybe even much later. Read anything I write with the above in mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree...

 

Do you know if the court will award the mandatory compensation award to the Tenant based solely on the fact that the landlord didn't provid ethe tenant with the information within the 14 days? In fact if the landlord never provided the information? He couldn't because he never protected it.

 

I am annoyed that there is a get out of jail card.

 

Finding a solicitor to help with the Housing Act is impossible!

If you find this post useful, please click the Scales of 'Justice' in the top right corner. Thanks ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone correct me if I am wrong but based on what i am thinking, and I will discuss below, there is no way out for a landlord if he tries to register a deposit after the tenenacy and before the court date - i.e. no 'get out of jail' card assuming the argument is presented in court correctly.

 

Ok, first of all, s.214(2) of the Housing Act 2004, states:

 

"Subsections (3) and (4) apply if on such an application the court—

(a) is satisfied that those requirements have not, or section 213(6)(a) has not, been complied with in relation to the deposit, or.."

 

 

In particular, "is satisfied that those requirements have not... been complied with..." is very important. I believe this line is referring to the requirements in s.213(1)(a)&(b), which states:

 

 

"(a) that the initial requirements of an authorised scheme (see section 213(4)) have not, or section 213(6)(a) has not, been complied with in relation to the deposit; or

(b) that he has been notified by the landlord that a particular authorised scheme applies to the deposit but has been unable to obtain confirmation from the scheme administrator that the deposit is being held in accordance with the scheme."

 

 

In summary, s.214(2)(a) says that for the 3 x deposit compensation rule to apply, then the court must be satisfied that the requirements, i.e. s.213(4) - "For the purposes of this section “the initial requirements” of an authorised scheme are such requirements imposed by the scheme as fall to be complied with by a landlord on receiving such a tenancy deposit." ) have not been adhered to, which they haven't because they never used a DPS or informed the tenant within 14 days from when they 'received such a deposit'.

 

 

 

I'm not a legal expert, but this is what I believe will stop the landlord being able to use his/her so called 'get out of jail' card. Opinions on this much appreciated.

 

 

 

Neo

If you find this post useful, please click the Scales of 'Justice' in the top right corner. Thanks ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Neo, I agree, finding a solicitor with the HA is near impossible. I found alitigation lawyer that is very knowledgable on this, and if they dont know straight away, they sure find out by the time you have the appointment.

I think you will find none of the 3 deposit schems will protect a deposit once the tenancy has ended. Sounds to me like you have a good case. £150 is not too much to lose if you have the chance to triple your deposit x

Best of luck, keep us posted

Please note, my advice is only my opinion.

If you have found my advice helpful, please tip my scales, thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

To give an update...

 

The landlord admitted in writing to me they did not protect the deposit as there was a verbal agreement in place between them and I at the stat apparently (it was never mentioned). The LL has counter claimed more than the original deposit for damage and I am getting legal advise on my response.

 

A 20 minute hearing is planned for late January with a Judge. In the end I had to fill in an allocation questionnaire for £150 which was a rip off but allowed the case to continue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Lefont, If you claim is under £5000 you should have had to fill out the allocation questionaire( cant remember the form code) but it should have only cost £35.

Every court seems to send out the form that is the most expensive, until you question it, then they send the correct one out.

 

Verbal agreement, my a**e, the judge will see straight through that. Your LL was obliged by laaw to protect your deposit, I would sit tight and look forward to a very fruitful January x

Please note, my advice is only my opinion.

If you have found my advice helpful, please tip my scales, thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't be so optimistic. If you had to pay the unnecessary allocation questionnaire, what else cannot happen? Think about the cases lost. Don't assume the judge is wise and knowledgeable, prepare your hearing as if the judge is on your LL's side and totally ignorant. You must show to the judge that you must be right and if he lets the LL win, he is against the law himself. Don't take anything for granted until you get the money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair comment, anyIdea, lets all cross our fingers and hope the judge does the right thingand fines the LL like the legislation states that he should.

Sometimes a little optimism peps you up a bit and helps you to see a light at the end of the tunnel x

Please note, my advice is only my opinion.

If you have found my advice helpful, please tip my scales, thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

My hearing is a 20 minute "directions hearing" if that changes anything. Having dealt with court admin, you get told a totally different story/policy every time I called or visited in person. It was apparent in almost all circumstances the admin was totally incompetent, let's hope the judge does not fall into the same category.

 

I am going to present my case pretty much as per the Housing Act section 214 below:

 

Housing Act 2004 – Section 214

 

Proceedings relating to tenancy deposits

(1)

Where a tenancy deposit has been paid in connection with a shorthold tenancy, the tenant or any relevant person (as defined by section 213(10)) may make an application to a county court on the grounds—

(a)

that the initial requirements of an authorised scheme (see section 213(4)) have not, or section 213(6)(a) has not, been complied with in relation to the deposit; or

(b)

that he has been notified by the landlord that a particular authorised scheme applies to the deposit but has been unable to obtain confirmation from the scheme administrator that the deposit is being held in accordance with the scheme.

(2)

Subsections (3) and (4) apply if on such an application the court—

(a)

is satisfied that those requirements have not, or section 213(6)(a) has not, been complied with in relation to the deposit, or

(b)

is not satisfied that the deposit is being held in accordance with an authorised scheme,

as the case may be.

(3)

The court must, as it thinks fit, either—

(a)

order the person who appears to the court to be holding the deposit to repay it to the applicant, or

(b)

order that person to pay the deposit into the designated account held by the scheme administrator under an authorised custodial scheme,

within the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the making of the order.

(4)

The court must also order the landlord to pay to the applicant a sum of money equal to three times the amount of the deposit within the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the making of the order.

(5)

Where any deposit given in connection with a shorthold tenancy could not be lawfully required as a result of section 213(7), the property in question is recoverable from the person holding it by the person by whom it was given as a deposit.

(6)

In subsection (5) “deposit” has the meaning given by section 213(8).

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
My hearing is a 20 minute "directions hearing" if that changes anything. Having dealt with court admin, you get told a totally different story/policy every time I called or visited in person. It was apparent in almost all circumstances the admin was totally incompetent, let's hope the judge does not fall into the same category.

 

I am going to present my case pretty much as per the Housing Act section 214 below:

 

Housing Act 2004 – Section 214

 

Proceedings relating to tenancy deposits

(1)

Where a tenancy deposit has been paid in connection with a shorthold tenancy, the tenant or any relevant person (as defined by section 213(10)) may make an application to a county court on the grounds—

(a)

that the initial requirements of an authorised scheme (see section 213(4)) have not, or section 213(6)(a) has not, been complied with in relation to the deposit; or

(b)

that he has been notified by the landlord that a particular authorised scheme applies to the deposit but has been unable to obtain confirmation from the scheme administrator that the deposit is being held in accordance with the scheme.

(2)

Subsections (3) and (4) apply if on such an application the court—

(a)

is satisfied that those requirements have not, or section 213(6)(a) has not, been complied with in relation to the deposit, or

(b)

is not satisfied that the deposit is being held in accordance with an authorised scheme,

as the case may be.

(3)

The court must, as it thinks fit, either—

(a)

order the person who appears to the court to be holding the deposit to repay it to the applicant, or

(b)

order that person to pay the deposit into the designated account held by the scheme administrator under an authorised custodial scheme,

within the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the making of the order.

(4)

The court must also order the landlord to pay to the applicant a sum of money equal to three times the amount of the deposit within the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the making of the order.

(5)

Where any deposit given in connection with a shorthold tenancy could not be lawfully required as a result of section 213(7), the property in question is recoverable from the person holding it by the person by whom it was given as a deposit.

(6)

In subsection (5) “deposit” has the meaning given by section 213(8).

 

I know this is 3 years ago now but what was the outcome of your case? Same thing is happeing to me and I'm debating whether or not to attempt a court scenario.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...