‘UNFAIR’: Landlord faces £5,000 fine for deposit protected six months late by her lettings agency
A landlord with a property in West Essex has urged LandlordZONE readers to be more careful when trusting agents to protect their tenants’ deposits via one of the government’s approved schemes after a vindictive renter took her to a property tribunal.
The female landlord, who wishes to remain anonymous until the legal process is exhausted, faces paying up to £5,000 to her former tenant after her letting agency protected his deposit with an approved scheme six months after the statutory 30-day deadline.
The tenant had caused water damage to the property during his 18-month stay between 2000 and 2021 and she sought to deduct money from his deposit via the deposit scheme’s redress process.
This deduction went ahead following the mediation process, but the tenant was then tipped off about late protection of the tenancy deposit and has now taken her to a First Tier Property Tribunal to claim up to three times his monthly rent in compensation via a ‘no-win, no-fee’ firm of solicitors
Tribunal
The landlord tells LandlordZONE that she spoke to the agency who had managed the property and asked that they help foot the bill for any potential award given by the tribunal.
But the agent inaccurately said it’s the landlord who is responsible, not the agent, and refused to get involved.
The landlord also says her deposit scheme has refused to give her any information that might help, which she needs as her letting agent went bust soon after the tenant left the property, so she needs confirmation that it was her agent who submitted the deposit late.
The lettings agency has subsequently started trading once again under new ownership and says the dispute is between the landlord and the firm’s previous owners.
“Since I got the letter from the solicitors I’ve been on anti-depressants because I can’t cope,” she says. “I feel everyone involved be it the deposit protection scheme or the letting agents have all left me high and dry to face this vindictive tenant alone. Where am I going to find £5,000?
“I keep wondering why the tenant would do this – but I suppose, like PPI claims, it’s because they can.”
Warning
The landlord says she wants other landlords to understand their responsibilities under the Housing Act 2004 and that they should not assume they are protected when a letting agency lodges a tenant’s deposit on their behalf via one of the three schemes – DPS, TDS and mydeposits.
“I did a ‘secret shopper’ ring-around of several agents in the area to ask them who is responsible for deposits, and many of them said it wasn’t the landlord – so even they don’t even know the law,” she adds.
“It has made me super aware of all of the regulations and rules governing the industry because it turns out I’m the one who foots the bill if it’s done incorrectly.”
Expert opinion
Sean Hooker, Head of Redress at the PRS, which was not involved in this case, says: “This is a tragic but rare set of circumstances.
“Both the landlord and the agent are jointly responsible for protecting the deposit once the tenant pays it over to the agent.
“If the deposit is not protected and the correct information provided to the tenant in time, then both parties are jointly responsible, but it is usually the landlord who is taken to court.
“A landlord cannot say it is ‘nothing to do with them’. They will have to deal with the situation and take their own action against the agent, either through a redress scheme or the courts. In this case, as the agent no longer exists, the landlord faces the rap on their own.”
©1999 – Present | Parkmatic Publications Ltd. All rights reserved | LandlordZONE® – ‘UNFAIR’: Landlord faces £5,000 fine for deposit protected six months late by her lettings agency | LandlordZONE.
View Full Article: ‘UNFAIR’: Landlord faces £5,000 fine for deposit protected six months late by her lettings agency
Post comment
Categories
- Landlords (19)
- Real Estate (9)
- Renewables & Green Issues (1)
- Rental Property Investment (1)
- Tenants (21)
- Uncategorized (11,923)
Archives
- December 2024 (50)
- November 2024 (64)
- October 2024 (82)
- September 2024 (69)
- August 2024 (55)
- July 2024 (64)
- June 2024 (54)
- May 2024 (73)
- April 2024 (59)
- March 2024 (49)
- February 2024 (57)
- January 2024 (58)
- December 2023 (56)
- November 2023 (59)
- October 2023 (67)
- September 2023 (136)
- August 2023 (131)
- July 2023 (129)
- June 2023 (128)
- May 2023 (140)
- April 2023 (121)
- March 2023 (168)
- February 2023 (155)
- January 2023 (152)
- December 2022 (136)
- November 2022 (158)
- October 2022 (146)
- September 2022 (148)
- August 2022 (169)
- July 2022 (124)
- June 2022 (124)
- May 2022 (130)
- April 2022 (116)
- March 2022 (155)
- February 2022 (124)
- January 2022 (120)
- December 2021 (117)
- November 2021 (139)
- October 2021 (130)
- September 2021 (138)
- August 2021 (110)
- July 2021 (110)
- June 2021 (60)
- May 2021 (127)
- April 2021 (122)
- March 2021 (156)
- February 2021 (154)
- January 2021 (133)
- December 2020 (126)
- November 2020 (159)
- October 2020 (169)
- September 2020 (181)
- August 2020 (147)
- July 2020 (172)
- June 2020 (158)
- May 2020 (177)
- April 2020 (188)
- March 2020 (234)
- February 2020 (212)
- January 2020 (164)
- December 2019 (107)
- November 2019 (131)
- October 2019 (145)
- September 2019 (123)
- August 2019 (112)
- July 2019 (93)
- June 2019 (82)
- May 2019 (94)
- April 2019 (88)
- March 2019 (78)
- February 2019 (77)
- January 2019 (71)
- December 2018 (37)
- November 2018 (85)
- October 2018 (108)
- September 2018 (110)
- August 2018 (135)
- July 2018 (140)
- June 2018 (118)
- May 2018 (113)
- April 2018 (64)
- March 2018 (96)
- February 2018 (82)
- January 2018 (92)
- December 2017 (62)
- November 2017 (100)
- October 2017 (105)
- September 2017 (97)
- August 2017 (101)
- July 2017 (104)
- June 2017 (155)
- May 2017 (135)
- April 2017 (113)
- March 2017 (138)
- February 2017 (150)
- January 2017 (127)
- December 2016 (90)
- November 2016 (135)
- October 2016 (149)
- September 2016 (135)
- August 2016 (48)
- July 2016 (52)
- June 2016 (54)
- May 2016 (52)
- April 2016 (24)
- October 2014 (8)
- April 2012 (2)
- December 2011 (2)
- November 2011 (10)
- October 2011 (9)
- September 2011 (9)
- August 2011 (3)
Calendar
Recent Posts
- Housing market to be busy in 2025 but doubts cast over Labour’s 1.5 million homes target
- Property Answers: What’s Next For 2025?
- Corporate landlords will replace buy to let landlords next year
- How Good Is Your Accountant? Essential Questions for Landlords
- NRLA slams Prime Minister for criticising landlords amid housing crisis