Deposit cock up with tenancy , am I screwed?

[Grunt Futtock]

C70R said:

You'll be paying him 3x the deposit, and if you're lucky you might just retain some cash to cover refurbishment. Let this be a lesson to you.

What information does the court use to determine penalty level? Is it simply length of time the deposit is unprotected?

[Wings]

Grunt Futtock said:

What information does the court use to determine penalty level? Is it simply length of time the deposit is unprotected?

ANY penalty is at the discretion of the courts, who can award between one and three times the Deposit amount, what a landlord/agent needs to do with facing such court action, is to produce evidence to show mitigating evidence financial losses/hardship (replacement blinds, cleaning costs possible other damages etc..

If you have returned all the tenant's Deposit monies, then I doubt any court will impose any penalty against you OP, but be very careful what you put in writing, since the court will see the same, so be very apologetic, admit your administration error in not protecting the Deposit, and list fully all the financial losses you have to incur, cleaning, blinds, etc. etc.

[alfie2244]

Wings said:

"so be very apologetic, admit your administration error in not protecting the Deposit"

This is the bit that doesn't seem to be coming across in his posts on here if I'm honest.....................it's not the mistakes you make but what you do after that matters and a bit of humility would go a long way IMO (esp as she is an old, disabled lady)

[p1stonhead]

Wings said:

Grunt Futtock said:

What information does the court use to determine penalty level? Is it simply length of time the deposit is unprotected?

ANY penalty is at the discretion of the courts, who can award between one and three times the Deposit amount, what a landlord/agent needs to do with facing such court action, is to produce evidence to show mitigating evidence financial losses/hardship (replacement blinds, cleaning costs possible other damages etc..

If you have returned all the tenant's Deposit monies, then I doubt any court will impose any penalty against you OP, but be very careful what you put in writing, since the court will see the same, so be very apologetic, admit your administration error in not protecting the Deposit, and list fully all the financial losses you have to incur, cleaning, blinds, etc. etc.

£500 for blinds will be hard to argue as reasonable and may come across as trying to be punitive. Good luck though OP.

[fido]

desolate said:

You should send a bit extra, just to make up for even having to ask.

Bet you wish you had now!

[Wings]

p1stonhead said:

£500 for blinds will be hard to argue as reasonable and may come across as trying to be punitive. Good luck though OP.

Stop distorting the facts and read my post again.

If the ex tenant's Deposit monies has been returned in full, then that person has suffered no financial loss, so any legal action by the ex tenant's son, will surely be seen by the courts as being punitive action by the son..

[superlightr]

Wings said:

Grunt Futtock said:

What information does the court use to determine penalty level? Is it simply length of time the deposit is unprotected?

ANY penalty is at the discretion of the courts, who can award between one and three times the Deposit amount, what a landlord/agent needs to do with facing such court action, is to produce evidence to show mitigating evidence financial losses/hardship (replacement blinds, cleaning costs possible other damages etc..

If you have returned all the tenant's Deposit monies, then I doubt any court will impose any penalty against you OP, but be very careful what you put in writing, since the court will see the same, so be very apologetic, admit your administration error in not protecting the Deposit, and list fully all the financial losses you have to incur, cleaning, blinds, etc. etc.

The only caveats I would add is that the courts "must" impose a penalty for a breach of a strict liability offence because this is stated in the Act
and the penalty will be "1-3 months" deposit not " upto 3 months" deposit.

I believe it to be a 1-3 months penalty so if you are lucky you will be fined 1 months deposit if not then anything from 1-3 months deposit.

s214 - "The Court must order the landlord to pay to the application a sum of money not less than the amount of the deposit and not more than three times the amount of the deposit within the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the making of the order"


Mitigation wont come into it as its a strict liability offence. No other consideration will come into it or be allowed - even if they have trashed the house. You have failed to protect the deposit = you are guilty. I'm certain you will be fined.

Let us know how you get on.

Use a Letting Agent next time.

Edited by superlightr on Tuesday 6th June 15:49

Edited by superlightr on Tuesday 6th June 15:54

Edited by superlightr on Tuesday 6th June 15:55

Edited by superlightr on Tuesday 6th June 15:56

[superlightr]

Wings said:

p1stonhead said:

£500 for blinds will be hard to argue as reasonable and may come across as trying to be punitive. Good luck though OP.

Stop distorting the facts and read my post again.

If the ex tenant's Deposit monies has been returned in full, then that person has suffered no financial loss, so any legal action by the ex tenant's son, will surely be seen by the courts as being punitive action by the son..

Got to disagree. Its a strict liability offence. Nothing else will be taken into consideration.

[anonymous-user]

superlightr said:

Got to disagree. Its a strict liability offence. Nothing else will be taken into consideration.

Correct. The only relevant fact is that the deposit was not protected in a deposit protection scheme.

[C70R]

superlightr said:

Wings said:

p1stonhead said:

£500 for blinds will be hard to argue as reasonable and may come across as trying to be punitive. Good luck though OP.

Stop distorting the facts and read my post again.

If the ex tenant's Deposit monies has been returned in full, then that person has suffered no financial loss, so any legal action by the ex tenant's son, will surely be seen by the courts as being punitive action by the son..

Got to disagree. Its a strict liability offence. Nothing else will be taken into consideration.

Correct.
Wings is busy trying to sound clever, without understanding the context of this particular offence. Altogether too many uninformed "experts" in SP&L.

[Du1point8]

C70R said:

superlightr said:

Wings said:

p1stonhead said:

£500 for blinds will be hard to argue as reasonable and may come across as trying to be punitive. Good luck though OP.

Stop distorting the facts and read my post again.

If the ex tenant's Deposit monies has been returned in full, then that person has suffered no financial loss, so any legal action by the ex tenant's son, will surely be seen by the courts as being punitive action by the son..

Got to disagree. Its a strict liability offence. Nothing else will be taken into consideration.

Correct.
Wings is busy trying to sound clever, without understanding the context of this particular offence. Altogether too many uninformed "experts" in SP&L.

I would assume Wings who has written many posts about LLs and I believe is a LL himself would know quite well the ins and outs of letting out property.

[C70R]

Du1point8 said:

C70R said:

superlightr said:

Wings said:

p1stonhead said:

£500 for blinds will be hard to argue as reasonable and may come across as trying to be punitive. Good luck though OP.

Stop distorting the facts and read my post again.

If the ex tenant's Deposit monies has been returned in full, then that person has suffered no financial loss, so any legal action by the ex tenant's son, will surely be seen by the courts as being punitive action by the son..

Got to disagree. Its a strict liability offence. Nothing else will be taken into consideration.

Correct.
Wings is busy trying to sound clever, without understanding the context of this particular offence. Altogether too many uninformed "experts" in SP&L.

I would assume Wings who has written many posts about LLs and I believe is a LL himself would know quite well the ins and outs of letting out property.

If I've been fed incorrect information, I'll gladly retract. But having been in this position (albeit on the other side), I was informed in no uncertain terms by a solicitor that this was "strict liability".

[Jonno02]

The tenants son sounds like a bit of a tt, to be honest. You did wrong and offered to make it right (ok, not right away), but he's just trying it on now.

Compensation generation.

[anonymous-user]

Jonno02 said:

The tenants son sounds like a bit of a tt, to be honest. You did wrong and offered to make it right (ok, not right away), but he's just trying it on now.

Compensation generation.

To be fair, if you found out that your old mum was being charged unfairly (in your eyes) after a 5 year tenancy AND that the deposit had never been protected I think you may feel different.

[kiethton]

Jonno02 said:

The tenants son sounds like a bit of a tt, to be honest. You did wrong and offered to make it right (ok, not right away), but he's just trying it on now.

Compensation generation.

Can't you just then sue the old lady for damages any anything else due under the contract?

If so a ....Take your deposit back and call it quits or your mum is being visited at unsociable hours by bailiffs for the rest of her life (phrased more appropriately and offer made without stick is made without prejudice) would be very mean and vindictive but should hopefully work?

[p1stonhead]

kiethton said:

Jonno02 said:

The tenants son sounds like a bit of a tt, to be honest. You did wrong and offered to make it right (ok, not right away), but he's just trying it on now.

Compensation generation.

Can't you just then sue the old lady for damages any anything else due under the contract?

If so a ....Take your deposit back and call it quits or your mum is being visited at unsociable hours by bailiffs for the rest of her life (phrased more appropriately and offer made without stick is made without prejudice) would be very mean and vindictive but should hopefully work?

Yeah you fk up so try and ruin someone else's life because of it.

Jesus Christ some people.

[C70R]

garyhun said:

Jonno02 said:

The tenants son sounds like a bit of a tt, to be honest. You did wrong and offered to make it right (ok, not right away), but he's just trying it on now.

Compensation generation.

To be fair, if you found out that your old mum was being charged unfairly (in your eyes) after a 5 year tenancy AND that the deposit had never been protected I think you may feel different.

Agreed. This is the self-same position that I found myself in. Landlord made up a bunch of spurious b*llocks charges after only 18mths in a property, having had a weekly cleaner for 2hrs (and full post-tenancy clean, as per contract) through the entire duration.

We knew that our landlord hadn't protected the deposit as soon as the time was up, but chose not to raise it and keep it in our back pockets in the eventuality that he became unreasonable. His attitude throughout the process of communicating the charges stunk so badly, that we took some legal advice (as mentioned) and sent him a "f*ck you" letter. Needless to say, the charges disappeared, and 3x the deposit (plus our original amount, untouched) arrived in our bank account without the need to go to court.

[kiethton]

p1stonhead said:

Yeah you fk up so try and ruin someone else's life because of it.

Jesus Christ some people.

Not quite, it may be enough to ensure that the more than equitable settlement already offered is taken and losses minimised

[alfie2244]

Jonno02 said:

The tenants son sounds like a bit of a tt, to be honest. You did wrong and offered to make it right (ok, not right away), but he's just trying it on now.

Compensation generation.

What do you think he should do then....call the son's bluff?

[CraigyMc]

Jonno02 said:

but he's just trying it on now.

If by "trying it on" you mean "using the law in the way it was intended to be used", then sure.

Tell you what, how about op charges the £500 to clean the place, and also pays the 3x deposit back.

Sound fair to you?