Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • If someone only receives a Govt benefit - ie working tax credit - and barely has enough money to pay for food, utilities, public transport and general essentials - what happens if their bank receives a 3rd party order to freeze the account because of an unpaid debt and a mistaken assumption that account holder has hidden funds/savings ?  Does the bank allow the account holder access to the bank to pay for life essentials?  Or does the bank literally freeze the account so nothing can be bought, no bills paid for ?   
    • Hi   As promised here is a response I have put together for you please fully amend as required   Dear XXXXXXXXXX   Complaint Reference: XXXXXXXXXXXXX   Further to your correspondence on XX/XX/2021 I find your response unacceptable for the following reasons:   You felt there was a data breach due to maladministration as we had the incorrect email address for you. As previously advised, the email was not sent to another individual but was undelivered due to having the incorrect email address. I   have requested a copy of the undeliverable message from our IT team. Once this has been received, I   will forward it to you. This has not been reported to our data protection officer as there was no breach. I  did also try to contact you by telephone to get the correct email address after it was returned to us, but there was no answer   I disagree with the above for the following reasons:   a) The Housing Association that sent it to the incorrect email address  b) The Housing Association were fully aware of my email address as you have been responding to myself at my email address even when I initially reported this and had a response from your online portal. c) This was a potential Data Protection Breach irrespective that it was undelivered and should therefore be reported to your data protection officer. d) You were responding to my emails at the correct email address and the as previously stated when I initially report this and got a response from your online portal to my email address, you incorrectly sent the response to an email address due to typo errors in that email address by the individual that sent.  e) If the individual that sent that email to the incorrect email address due to typo errors was yourself then you have a Conflict of Interest in dealing with this matter as it involves yourself and someone else should be responding to that matter therefore I require clarification if it was indeed yourself that sent the email to the incorrect email address.   You feel that this should be a stage 2 as your response was out of time due to having the incorrect email address. You received the response one week after it had been originally sent, once you provided the correct email address. This would not meet the criteria for escalating to stage 2. I  had already offered compensation of £25 for the delay in responding to your complaint. My colleague that reviewed this for stage 2 has advised that an additional £25 could also be offered to compensate for the delay caused by not having the correct email address.  Please note any compensation awarded would be offset against outstanding arrears in the first instance should there be any on your account.   I disagree with the above for the following reasons:   a) Your initial response was sent to an incorrect email address due to typo error irrespective that it was received one week later it was still out with the agreed stage 1 Time Limits therefore should be dealt with as a Stage 2 Complaint    Contents insurance is the responsibility of the resident to arrange. You are aware when you take on your tenancy that your personal belongings are your responsibility to repair and maintain, not A2Dominions. As such, any insurance to cover these items would have to be arranged by the tenant. There is no requirement for us to advise of this. Your tenancy agreement gives a comprehensive overview of what is A2Dominion responsibility. Should you have any queries about these. you can refer to the document   I disagree with the above for the following reasons:   a) As I was not aware of this by your staff when I took out this tenancy but you point out I was made aware therefore I would like to be provided with evidence from my housing file that I was informed of this when signing this tenancy agreement. If you cannot provide this then you cannot state that I was made aware at the time of taking up this tenancy. b) You point out their is no requirement for you to advise of this which I find astounding for any Housing Association to state this as they should be making any new tenant fully aware that Contents Insurance is required and the reason.   I  have been informed that the flood affected many members of the community that day. There were so many people affected that a local support group was also set up. This shows that the issue was widespread, not just limited to affecting your property and also proves that the issue stemmed from a wider mains issue. I do appreciate that there was a blockage in your drain which exacerbated the issue within your property, but as advised in my stage 1 response, this was attended within our urgent call out timeframe of 24 hrs. This was then passed back to Pyramid Plus as they were unable to dear the blockage, and follow on works were arranged. We are unable to attend to issues until we know about them, and we attended as soon as this was reported to us.   I disagree with the above for the following reasons:   a) In a previous response you blamed the mains water companies issue therefore not the Housings issue now you have changed it to a wider mains issue yet as I preciously asked to be provided with evidence again you have failed to provide that evidence. b) The blockage which you have previously been in denial about and suddenly admitted and openly blamed the main previously you have know admitted. As this blockage I within your property boundaries and is inside internal in my property the Housing is responsible for that issue and the further damage caused. In reference to your request for the previous reports by other residents, we would be unable to provide that information to you. We cannot discuss any reports by other residents under any circumstances   I disagree with the above for the following reason:   a) My request for how may tenants have complained about this you previously stated 'your system does not allow you to find this information' and now it is 'we cannot discuss reports made by other residents under any circumstances' I find this completely unacceptable as I did not ask this I only ask how many tenants had complaint about this issue whether it be one or ten as an example how difficult can it be as this does not breach any data protection laws and if you still insist on this approach then you can provide my with with full and I do mean full clarification as to your reason with which article and section of the data protection act you are using for your failure to comply with a reasonable request and your failure still to explain FOI.    
    • No!   Not because what you've written is wrong - it isn't - but because it's best to keep Simple Simon in the dark about how you are going to bat off his claim.   Look at   https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/393251-received-a-court-claim-from-a-private-parking-speculative-invoice-how-to-deal-with-it-hereupdated-jun-2021/   and then scroll down to   Q2) How should I defend?   Adapt the defence there.   The more you read up on VCS "no stopping" airport threads here the more you'll educate yourself on what needs to be done.
    • Defence :   1. No keeper liability as this is not “relevant land” under the POFA 2012 and I the defendant puts it to strict proof that VCS show as to who was the driver at the time. 2. No contract was ever offered by VCS, land is subject to own byelaws and signage is prohibitive so there can be no monies due as a result of either a contractual charge or as a result of a breach of contract.   is that enough?
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Deposit not lodged in scheme and now not being paid back


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3469 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

Hi,

 

our property was repossessed due to the landlady not paying her mortgage despite us paying our rent.

 

I applied for a stay on the eviction and they gave us 2 months (as per legal guidelines). Well in advance of this our tenancy agreement had expired. She didn't give us one despite us asking as I believe she knew about the reposession.

 

Now we've moved out the landlady has rented the house to another person (how I don't know!!) and has promised to pay our deposit back but all we've had so far is a bounced cheque.

 

I believe it wasn't lodged in any scheme as we have no documents to support this.

 

Can I simply go to the county court and issue a Money Claim or is there a better way of doing it? I want to be a diligent as possible so she cannot slip the net. She has a slimy 'financial advisor' who handles all her dealings and I know if there's a way out he'll take it.

 

Furthermore, I believe I can claim the original deposit (£500) and 3 times the amount in addition (£2k altogether) or can I just claim for the 3 x deposit?.

 

I don't want to waste time and need a quick resolution to this as it's already been delayed.

 

Any help would be great :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Further update:

 

The original deposit of £500 has been paid back 30 mins ago.

 

The landlady has caused us severe issues and stress (pregnant wife etc) and I don't want to let her off lightly.

 

Can I still claim 3 x deposit under the relevant section of the act governing the TDS?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds like you asked the wrong person for the 2 months. The Mortgage Reposession (Protection of tenants) Act 2010 relates to mortgage lenders taking action, to grant tenants 2 month's grace, not the landlrod. If it has been re-let it sounds like she averted evcition in the end anyway.As for the deposit. The protection rules were strengthened and brought back in by the Localism Act and landlords had until 6th May 2012 to get any unprotected depsoits in. Part of the problem with the old law and how it was worded was that it stated the courts would order the landlrod to pay back the deposit and "Must also" order them to pay a penalty, so if the deposit was returned the "Must also" was already invalidated. this has been corrected.The procedure is to check with the 3 schemes, DPS, TDS and My Deposits and get them to send you confirmation, email will do, that the deposit wasnt protected. Then get a form N208 from either the HMCS website or directly from the local county court and launch a cliam, which will now be up to 3 x the amount of the depsoit.You can never guarnatee a result in county court however but good luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Ben Reeve Lewis - even if my deposit was returned this morning would I still be able to claim as the deposit wasn't protected? (once confirmation received from DPS, TDS and MyDeposits?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should, in theory, be able to claim whether it has been returned to you or not. The basis for the claim is that it hadnt been protected and you werent given notification of the scheme in the prescribed form, both of which should entitle you to apply for the penalty. The troubel is the old deposit legislation was so badly drafted it fell apart when tested in court cases which is why they had to re-draft it to handle the problems thrown up by the wording of the original. God only knows if it will hold water this time but worth a go.The trouble I would anticpate is that under the old rules the penalty was a fixed amount of 3 x the deposit but many judges were unwilling to go that far when a landlord had merely not known about the law or had made a mistake. A judge in your case make take the view that in handing back the deposit it was showing a certain willingness to cooperate and so may not grant much of a penalty. Its too early to tell as the enw version of depsoit protection is literally only a few weeks old

Link to post
Share on other sites

The landlord cannot claim they didn't know as I have text conversations, it also clearly states on the tenancy agreement that our deposit will be lodged in a government approved scheme etc.

 

They've not shown willingness as I've had to threaten them today to get this far and their bounced cheques, eviction orders (for the mortgagee because she was behind on her payments etc) doesn't show any willing but basically shows them buying time.

 

I know the landlady is going thru a divorce and is trying to milk her ex hisband as he's been to see me and let me know what's going on. To that effect I know that she has been squandering 'our' rent money on frivolous shops etc and although that's none of my business I feel annoyed with how little consideration she's shown and just how many lies she's told us!

Link to post
Share on other sites

When did the tenancy actually end? if befire the 6th May the you may not be able to sue for non-protection?

If after then yes you can sue in the county court.

The judge would decide on the level of compensation, if any.

 

It ended in February of this year and since then we've not had another agreement from the LL

Link to post
Share on other sites

You will not be able to sue for non-protection as the tenancy ended before the new legislation, which came in on April 6th 2012.

and under the old legislation you cannot sue for compensation once the tenancy has ended.

As you have now got your deposit back, thats about it. a result realy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...