Jump to content

Question on nature of tenancy agreement and possibility to claim TDS fine.

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4555 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


Start your own new thread

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



Recommended Posts

Hi there,


I've got a question regarding a tenancy agreement I had with a guy, here is the situation:


I rented a room in a 2 bedroom flatshare with a guy - let's call him John. I had a contract directly with him. I was paying my rent to him and he kept my deposit (actually I paid the deposit to the person who was leaving the vacant room).

The flat was originally rented by another guy through an agency - let's call him Paul. Paul decided to live with his friend John, who got the second room. Paul had to leave the country and he let his friend John live in there and run the flat, despite John was not on the contract with the agency. In a nutshell Paul rented the whole flat from an agency, sublet it to John who later on sublet the second room to me.


When I left the flatshare John did not give me back the entire depost (he unfairly retained £200) and I am currently in a small claim to get it back.

My question is did he have the right to lend me the room in the first place? Is there anything like that that could help me to win the case ? The contract I signed says "Assured Shorthold Tenancy" but someone told me it was not one given the nature of the tenancy, is it right ? I'd like to know that too because I am thinking of filing a second claim because he did not protect my deposit through the Tenancy Deposit Scheme and recover my deposit plus the 3x fine.


Thanks in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

a free bump to try and get you some advice...

I am not a lawyer - I'm an Engineer with an interest in law. Advice is given with out prejudice and is my opinion on the information I have been provided with based on my experience, understanding and interpritation of law. If you are in any doubt please seek the advice of a qualified and insured legal professional.



Abbey (OH) - £680 ..... Barclaycard (OH) - £2200 ..... MBNA (OH) - £1800 ..... Shop Direct (OH) - £220

Brunell Franklin (a.k.a. Conkers) - Out of "contract" & no charge



In Progress:

MBNA (OH) - PPI & bad default with premature termination

Capital One (OH) - ~£800 Penalty Charges

Suzuki Finance/Blackhorse (OH) - Commission, Unlawful removal, PPI, Charges


A Lightbulb Shop - "loss of bargain"


If i've helped, please feel free to hit the star ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the landlord was aware of your prescence and you paid your rent to him/his agency I would say you had an AST and the deposit should be protected. If, as the situation you describe sounds, you paid rent directly to the other 'tenenat' (who was infact your Landlord), then you where only a lodger and the depsoit did not need to be protected.


If you have already began a claim, the judge may give you some pointers.

Link to post
Share on other sites


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...