Tenancy deposit protection scheme. I WON THE CASE!!!!!!!

[furbinka01]

:):)Hi everyone, just want to say to u, who s landlord didn t protect your deposit, TAKE THEM TO COURT, REALLY EASY....

I had 6 months long assured short hold tenancy, starting in august 2007, after we move out, our lanlord retur only part of deposit and charged us for cleaning (i had house profesionaly cleaned after we moved out) and for inventory check out, which wasn t in our contract.

After so many telephone conversation with landlord, that I disagrre with deduction what he make I make some research on internet and found out about protection scheme.

Next day I wrote to landlord about it and said that I m going to take court action. Two days latter, I recieved rest of the deposit> I wrote to him again, saing that if he retur this money at the start I would be happy, but now I m gonna claim 3 times penalty, because he broke the law.

Next day I recieved letter saying that I m never gonna win this case.

But he was very wrong, yesterday I won!!!!!!!!!

Hearing was easy, judge didn t even ask me anything, just talk to the landlord, that law saying he must protect deposit and if not, he must give him penalty of 3 time the original deposit....

In next 14 I m waiting for my pay day, lucky me...

[help me kick his butt]

Fabulous, I only hope im this lucky too. well done xx

[Lula]

congratulations, let us know if he pays up, sorry, but we are a cynical lot in here

[MrShed]

Brilliant result.

 

If possible(up to you) - can you supply details of the case(i.e. which court etc) we are trying to track these cases!

[Aequitas]

Brilliant result.

 

Absolutely!

 

Interestingly. it is reported that at least one judge has refused to award compensation on the basis that after the tenancy ends the tenant is no longer the tenant and therefore cannot apply.

[callumsgran]

Absolutely!

 

Interestingly. it is reported that at least one judge has refused to award compensation on the basis that after the tenancy ends the tenant is no longer the tenant and therefore cannot apply.

So are you supposed to sue whilst you are still the tenant and run the risk of being evicted?

Typical a*se about face law we have in this country

[MrShed]

Cg - that was an interpretation by the presiding judge. It is "fairly" commonly read that his interpretation was incorrect. Unfortunately, that case did not go to appeal.

 

In any event, it was at county court so (luckily) does not set a precedent.

[callumsgran]

Cg - that was an interpretation by the presiding judge. It is "fairly" commonly read that his interpretation was incorrect. Unfortunately, that case did not go to appeal.

 

In any event, it was at county court so (luckily) does not set a precedent.

Lol, thanks Sheddy just testing!!

[MrShed]

No worries, just clarifying

 

CG I totally forget - was it you setting up their own LA?

[callumsgran]

No worries, just clarifying

 

CG I totally forget - was it you setting up their own LA?

Yes hun, i went through the motions but things didnt work out, personal circs, finances etc

Blooming Southcourt not all they're cracked up to be

Still pop onto LLZ to wind them up every now and again lol

[MrShed]

Coulda told you that about SC lol

 

Thinking about trying again at any point then?

[callumsgran]

I might do, sometime in the future

Not at the present climate though lol

[Olga_Garcia]

:):)Hi everyone, just want to say to u, who s landlord didn t protect your deposit, TAKE THEM TO COURT, REALLY EASY....

 

 

Hi there,

 

I am in a similar situation to yours and going to court next week. I am gathering court cases in the same circumstances. Could you please tell me the details of your court case. This is name of the landlord versus name of the tenant, date and court where it all happen.

 

I have been busy trying to understand the law and the housing act and I have found few cases recently that are no as black and white as yours. I just want to win the case!!! I will ;-))))

 

Please let me know at your earliest convenience but soon please!!!

 

Ol

[Kristina2011]

original message deleted, posted by mistake

Edited May 16, 2011 by Kristina2011

[queensclose]

Emm. Proof surveys are rigged

 

BCW GROUP CLIMBS TO 47 IN THE UK’s BEST COMPANIES TO WORK FOR

[Ed999]

My advice is applicable only if the rented premises are entirely within England and Wales, and only if you were granted a shorthold tenancy (under which you [and your spouse/partner/children if any] had exclusive use of a seperate dwelling, which was not shared with another tenant nor with the landlord) and you were over 18 years of age when the tenancy was granted.

 

 

I am in a similar situation to yours and going to court next week. I am gathering court cases in the same circumstances. Could you please tell me the details of your court case. This is name of the landlord versus name of the tenant, date and court where it all happen.

 

I have been busy trying to understand the law and the housing act and I have found few cases recently that are no as black and white as yours. I just want to win the case!!! I will ;-))))

 

Please let me know at your earliest convenience but soon please!!!

 

 

You have posted in a thread from 2008 that is over two years old! Needless to say, you will not get a reply from the o/p.

 

Much has changed in this area of law in the past two and a half years; and the case mentioned in this thread, which was decided when this type of claim was in its infancy, would not be decided the same way now.

 

 

If you paid a deposit, read the FAQs about the tenancy deposit scheme, under which you might be entitled to sue for compensation if you had a shorthold tenancy -

 

- Tenancy Deposit Scheme

 

- Tenancy Deposit Protection - First High Court Decision

 

- TDS eligibility, implication of breach and legal questions answered

 

 

The Court of Appeal decided in 2010 in the case of Tiensia v Vision Enterprises that if the Landlord protects or repays the deposit even as late as the day of the court hearing, or at any time before judgement (if later), the court will not be able to award the penalty of three times the amount of the deposit.

 

This was NOT overturned by the High Court decision in Potts v Densley in 2011. Read the full transcript of the Judgement, in that link, as it will give you some idea of the Court's approach to this type of case.

 

In Potts v Densley, the tenant did argue that the Act requires the landlord to protect the deposit before the tenancy ends. The High Court in Potts was not bound by the Court of Appeal's earlier decision in Tiensia, because in Tiensia the landlord had protected the deposit at a time when the tenancy still existed; but the High Court in Potts nevertheless rejected the tenant's argument [at paragraph 55 in the Judgement].

 

In Potts, the tenant might still have won, if she had raised the point that the landlord had failed to provide her with the prescribed information pursuant to section 213(5). But she failed to do so, thus the County Court judge never heard evidence on that issue; and on an appeal before the High Court the witnesses are not called to re-hash their evidence. The tenant was thus proved fatally mistaken in believing she could succeed in such a complex case without a Solicitor.

 

 

Suing for the penalty, or merely threatening to do so, can cause the landlord to return the entire deposit to you, without any deductions, thus resolving a dispute over disrepair; although the landlord could, alternatively, put the deposit into a TDS scheme instead, and continue to argue for deductions for disrepair.

 

The Act expressly states that the parties to the tenancy cannot agree not to protect the deposit. So it's futile for the landlord to raise this defence - but many still try to!

 

While the deposit is not protected, any section 21 notice given to the tenant is invalid, so will not end the tenancy. But a section 8 notice can validly be given.

 

 

Also read the FAQ about what deductions the landlord can lawfully make from the deposit -

 

- Unfair deposit deductions

 

 

It is unclear whether you can sue, for failure to protect the deposit, while the tenancy is still in existence. On the other hand, at least one judge refused to award compensation on the basis that after the tenancy ends the tenant is no longer the tenant, therefore cannot apply.

 

 

Be sure to take a Solicitor to the hearing with you, because the law is quite complex in this type of claim.

Edited May 16, 2011 by Ed999