How to chase Landlord for late deposit protection penalty

[landlor]

My joint tenancy ended last year on 7-June-2013. It was joint tenancy which started in Dec-2011 , ending on Nov-2012. The other two joint tenants left mid way through this period and I stayed on. [with other new friends that came along and shared the apartment. All this in full cognizance of the landlord.] The landlord had not protected the deposit until Nov-2012 when I started asking him deposit-id and he eventually deposited with DPS but late by almost ten months. I am now relatively free from work and family and want use time to claim the penalty from landlord for delay in protecting my deposit. I have spoken to the landlord about it and he wants to see me in the court. The deposit has already been adjudicated by DPS. As it was joint tenancy, I have obtained letters from other two tenants authorising me to act on their behalf in this matter of claiming penalty I need advise on what I need to do next: I mean which court forms I need to fill and what are the things I really need to be cautious of. Thanks for your help/advise. Regards

[raydetinu]

So has the deposit been sorted and settled?

I suggest you speak to your local court about which court and what forms or you could do it on line ( MCOL ).

Now it is not clear whether you can do this in SCC as it is not a dispute and in fact a point of law. So may have to be done in county Court fast track, which will involve about 1k+ in fees up front and possibly a barrister.

You may also only get 1x deposit in compensation if you win, which may not cover your costs.

Best to consult a solicitor IMO. and think is it worth the risk!

However some judges appear to allow such a claim in SCC if part of a deposit dispute.

[landlor]

So has the deposit been sorted and settled?

I suggest you speak to your local court about which court and what forms or you could do it on line ( MCOL ).

Now it is not clear whether you can do this in SCC as it is not a dispute and in fact a point of law. So may have to be done in county Court fast track, which will involve about 1k+ in fees up front and possibly a barrister.

You may also only get 1x deposit in compensation if you win, which may not cover your costs.

Best to consult a solicitor IMO. and think is it worth the risk!

However some judges appear to allow such a claim in SCC if part of a deposit dispute.

 

Yes the deposit is sorted. The LL tried all stunts but DPS gave back all the money to me. Why are you so pessimistic that I may get least possible and that the expenses may be highest possible. Most people are well aware that the losing party pays for the expenses of winning party. So if my case is right, then there is no reason for me to be scared. Stop being a scare-monger.

 

You response really smacks of you being member of some Landlord's association in cheap suit.

 

I know there is a mariner on this forum as well on this forum who is your professional cousin.

 

Why will I need a barrister?

Edited August 12, 2014 by newlyn

[mariner51]

"I know there is a mariner on this forum as well on this forum who is your professional cousin."

 

What are you implying? I am my own man, with my own opinions, not a 'professional cousin of anyone.

 

Please do not castigate a valued Gold Account advisor with over 5660 posts on the Forum, esp when you have only 8, mainly about debt collection in the Benefits & HMRC forum and a newbie member!

 

 

Your non-deposit claim covers both pre & post Localism Act Apr 2012, in terms of when deposit should have been protected.

Some SCCs are now allowing such claims, at less risk/upfront cost to applicant but poss lower compensation payout at Judges discretion.

The SCC Adjudicator could decide the LLs mistake does not warrant compensation and only order repayment of orig deposit, - which has been done.

If it were to be allocated to CC fastrack pathway, there is no guarantee Judge would order costs in your favour, esp if he feels the claim was frivolous or mischievous.

 

 

You appear to have a valid case, so pay your money and take your chances.

[f16]

Yes the deposit is sorted. The LL tried all stunts but DPS gave back all the money to me. Why are you so pessimistic that I may get least possible and that the expenses may be highest possible. Most people are well aware that the losing party pays for the expenses of winning party. So if my case is right, then there is no reason for me to be scared. Stop being a scare-monger.

 

You response really smacks of you being member of some Landlord's association in cheap suit.

 

I know there is a mariner on this forum as well on this forum who is your professional cousin.

 

Why will I need a barrister?

 

Are you sure ?????

 

Post Reported.

 

Suggestion

 

SORRY should be the first word of your next post.

[citizenB]

Newlyn, I rather suspect you have misread the advice given.. there was nothing pessimistic at all in the post made by raydetinu. The suggestion that you take some legal advice prior to proceeding is sound.

[landlor]

Newlyn, I rather suspect you have misread the advice given.. there was nothing pessimistic at all in the post made by raydetinu. The suggestion that you take some legal advice prior to proceeding is sound.

 

That reply, however you read, only says that don't chase the landlord for penalty.

 

The fees can go upto 1k+

I could possibly have to pay for LL's cost.

 

What are these these points. It is valid that the losing side pays for the cost of other side but that applies equally well on both sides. Even if this was an FYI, the overall tone of the reply is not neutral.

 

That reply does not reflect a neutral viewpoint. As I said there definitely are people from LL organisations who probably are paid/employed to be a scare monger.

 

In my case there is no dispute on deposit as that has been adjudicated and returned in full by DPS already. The LL is not happy with the outcome and says he will bring-up those and some new losses to the court if I were to pull him to the court.

 

So my question was what is the correct process to follow., given my situation explained above. I came here to find the correct court forms etc so as to avoid following a wrong procedure and making my case weaker.

Edited August 13, 2014 by newlyn

[Steve__M]

That reply does not reflect a neutral viewpoint. As I said there definitely are people from LL organisations who probably are paid/employed to be a scare monger.

 

So no apology to raydetinu or mariner for your unproven (and in my opinion incorrect) allegations based on an over-interpretation of raydetinu's post, then.

 

Try MCOL and report back on how it went. That will be a good test of whether the CPR rules are being strictly adhered to (which require a more expensive process) or not. The NUS seem to be advising this, for example.

[landlor]

MCOL, CPR, NUS:

 

These are all greek to me.

[landlor]

So no apology to raydetinu or mariner for your unproven (and in my opinion incorrect) allegations based on an over-interpretation of raydetinu's post, then.

 

Try MCOL and report back on how it went. That will be a good test of whether the CPR rules are being strictly adhered to (which require a more expensive process) or not. The NUS seem to be advising this, for example.

 

The very fact that some of the so called senior members have so many posts shows that this is what they do day-in and out. And I have read many of their replies. All of them smack of scare mongering.

[citizenB]

MCOL, CPR, NUS:

 

These are all greek to me.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?351648-Glossary-of-Abbreviations/page2

 

MCOL - Money Claim online

CPR - Civil Procedure Rules

 

Confess, I dont know what NUS is and when someone lets us know, I can add it to the glossary of abbreviations which can be found on the link above.

[honeybee13]

It could be the National Union of Students, CB.

 

HB

[raydetinu]

ahem!

don't need an apology!

I was just advising on the facts as I see them;

And as I said try the SCC route, but I feel this will not be allowed as you challenging on a point of law only.

The amount of compensation you receive is entirely up to the judge and for a one off late protection by a LL, it more than likely you would only get the minimum, as you have not suffered too great an inconvenience and the LL did in fact protect it. ( albeit late ).

It is fact that if you go the fast track route your court fees WILL be in excess of 1k just to file the claim, and the judge may not award you these costs even if you win, if he feels the case was not actually warranted.

 

 

In fact some judges put the whole act into disrepute by denying any such claim exists: ( back to the old interpretation jargon again ).

read Lea posts in.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?429031-LL-(Housing-Association)-deposit-no-longer-protected

 

 

I was only trying to point out that it will not be easy or straight forward as you may think!

[citizenB]

It could be the National Union of Students, CB.

 

HB

 

[Steve__M]

MCOL, CPR, NUS:

 

These are all greek to me.

 

tis indeed the National Union of Students

[landlor]

ahem!

don't need an apology!

I was just advising on the facts as I see them;

And as I said try the SCC route, but I feel this will not be allowed as you challenging on a point of law only.

The amount of compensation you receive is entirely up to the judge and for a one off late protection by a LL, it more than likely you would only get the minimum, as you have not suffered too great an inconvenience and the LL did in fact protect it. ( albeit late ).

It is fact that if you go the fast track route your court fees WILL be in excess of 1k just to file the claim, and the judge may not award you these costs even if you win, if he feels the case was not actually warranted.

 

 

In fact some judges put the whole act into disrepute by denying any such claim exists: ( back to the old interpretation jargon again ).

read Lea posts in.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?429031-LL-(Housing-Association)-deposit-no-longer-protected

 

 

I was only trying to point out that it will not be easy or straight forward as you may think!

 

 

The LL did not protect my deposit for any of the previous two years and also for the current year when he did deposit after I chased him for it a few times ( I have an email in this regard), he did not send me the prescribed information booklet. Does this info make any difference to the case.

[raydetinu]

This is where you may need legal advise: localism act came in on April 2012, which required LL to protect any existing tenants deposit by end of May 2012.

Any non -protection for a tenancy that ended prior to April 2012 cannot be acted on once the tenancy had ended. Which is different now or should be!

 

 

So LL was six months late, as said before some judges may uphold your claim, some may not as it has been protected ( arguing a point of law ) so could be difficult.

 

 

If you read the other thread all is not straight forward, like any case before a judge YOU may think it is straight forward but often they can put their own interpretation on it ( Judges are a law unto themselves! ).

Don't be put off if you think it is worth pursuing, but don't think it will be money for nothing ( punitive ) judges don't like that.

 

 

As said previously in some SCC cases where their is a dispute over the return of the deposit and a claim for non-protection is part of that claim, I understand the judge has in fact ruled for the compensation as well, when the LL has appeared to be particularly difficult and awkward.

 

 

good luck anyway and let us know what you decide and how you are getting on and if you need any further advice along the way, we are here to help.

[landlor]

This is where you may need legal advise: localism act came in on April 2012, which required LL to protect any existing tenants deposit by end of May 2012.

Any non -protection for a tenancy that ended prior to April 2012 cannot be acted on once the tenancy had ended. Which is different now or should be!

 

 

So LL was six months late, as said before some judges may uphold your claim, some may not as it has been protected ( arguing a point of law ) so could be difficult.

 

 

If you read the other thread all is not straight forward, like any case before a judge YOU may think it is straight forward but often they can put their own interpretation on it ( Judges are a law unto themselves! ).

Don't be put off if you think it is worth pursuing, but don't think it will be money for nothing ( punitive ) judges don't like that.

 

 

As said previously in some SCC cases where their is a dispute over the return of the deposit and a claim for non-protection is part of that claim, I understand the judge has in fact ruled for the compensation as well, when the LL has appeared to be particularly difficult and awkward.

 

 

good luck anyway and let us know what you decide and how you are getting on and if you need any further advice along the way, we are here to help.

 

I am taking the LL for delay in protecting and not providing "Prescribed Information Booklet" at all. I will add the rest of points to project that the LL always had intention of retaining my deposit, given the kind of claims he made with DPS. He clearly had a plan in mind to deceive me but could not because I frustrated his plans.

[landlor]

Hi All, Since when has tds non-compliance been allowed to be dealt by SSC or MCOL.

 

I thought they are dealt in country court only.

[honeybee13]

Did you try MCOL or seeking legal advice as advised further up the thread please?

 

HB

[landlor]

Did you try MCOL or seeking legal advice as advised further up the thread please?

 

HB

 

 

I have not had opportunity to get to Citizens Advise Bureau for legal advise. I can definitely not ask CAB lots of question as they have limited time for each appointment.

 

I am just requesting the information as to since when has tds non-compliance been allowed to be dealt by SSC or MCOL. Was there a change in system recently or it always was there?

[raydetinu]

We keep going around in circles; nothing is set in stone apparently, diff courts seem allow different things despite CPR etc. and that's not just this type of thing.

As said normally points of law are not dealt with in SCC! but some judges have been allowing it when it comes up as part of a case, and others just appear to throw it out! SCC is very informal and generally a lot of leeway is given/allowed.

You will just have to try and see how it goes.

[mariner51]

It started to appear in SCC after the claim limit was raised to £10K about 18 months ago. Some Judges allow SCC in order to reduce time pressure on CC and the fact it costs less to bring a SCC claim. I believe the Part 8 requirement was dropped about the same time.

It makes it easier/cheaper for Ts to bring a non-protection claim, but protects the LL defendent from uncapped plaintiff's defence costs.

[landlor]

It started to appear in SCC after the claim limit was raised to £10K about 18 months ago. Some Judges allow SCC in order to reduce time pressure on CC and the fact it costs less to bring a SCC claim. I believe the Part 8 requirement was dropped about the same time.

It makes it easier/cheaper for Ts to bring a non-protection claim, but protects the LL defendant from uncapped plaintiff's defence costs.

 

Thanks Mariner for a to-the-point the reply.

 

Just one more question. In case I bring it in SCC and SCC drops it, then

 

(1) Will I lose the fee as well

(2) Does it make my case weaker.

[raydetinu]

probably best to check with court; but I suspect once you have launched a claim fees are not returnable!

The problem with this is the amount you are claiming ( if you are going for 3x , which is at judges discretion ) as fees are base on a sliding scale, with mcol being about 10% cheaper.

fees:

https://www.gov.uk/make-court-claim-for-money/going-to-court

 

 

Is your LL aware you are considering this action, as usually you are required to issue a letter before action, so defendant has opportunity to get matter resolved /settled prior to actually going to court.

This is not always necessary; another CPR that is often not held up anymore.