X

Sign Up

or

By signing up I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions


Already a PT member? Log In

Sign Up

Sign Up With Facebook, Twitter, or Google

or


By signing up, I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions


Already a PT member? Log In

Log In

or


Don't have an account? Sign Up

Forgot Password

To reset your password just enter the email address you registered with and we'll send you a link to access a new password.


Already a PT member? Log In

Don't have an account? Sign Up

  • Deposit Protection

    Deposit claims for rent in lieu of notice

    http://www.propertyindustryeye.com/landl...ut-notice/

    The Tenancy Deposit Scheme publishes real life case studies in our monthly adjudication digest, shared by Property Industry Eye (above link).

    The latest edition gives important information to landlords about claiming rent in lieu of notice. In this case the landlord claimed one month's rent because the tenant left the property without giving notice at the end of the fixed term of the tenancy. Whilst the tenancy agreement did require one month's notice from the tenant, the TDS adjudicator was not able to make an award to the landlord.

    Why not? Tenants of an AST are entitled to end a tenancy by giving vacant possession at the end of the fixed term. The tenant did this and therefore their liability to pay rent ended on the last day of the tenancy.

    The landlord did have potential for a claim - but he failed to make it.

    The tenant broke the agreement by not giving one month's notice. The landlord could have sought compensation for financial loss he suffered as a result (e.g an extended period of the property being left empty), but this was not the reason for his claim. No case was made nor evidence given that he suffered a financial loss.

    It demonstrates some important points which apply to all disputes. A deposit can only be used when terms of the agreement have not been met, in order to put the landlord back into the position they would have been had the tenant met them. It is then down to the landlord to justify why he is entitled to the money - do not forget that the deposit money belongs to the tenant.

    Adjudicators resolve the dispute put before them and don't carry out investigations into other potential claims the landlord could make. Decisions are based on the case made and evidence supporting it. If you are a landlord entering into a dispute, make sure you have a clear case as to how the tenant has broken the agreement, the value of the loss you have suffered as a result, and documentary evidence to show it.

    More dispute case studies are on the TDS website: http://www.tds.gb.com/case-studies.html
    0
    0
    or use the County Court if there's serious money involved. Adjudicators don't look into a case very deeply and tend to be biased towards the tenant.
    0
    0
    So what you are really saying is, when "adjudicators" preside over a dispute, common sense goes out of the window Confused
    0
    0

    Save Money on All of Your Utilities Attract Prospects to Your MLM Business

    As I see it the landlord asked for X due A, if they had asked for X due to B they would have got it.

    A judge would likely have asked questions then decided, but the deposit protection people decide base ONLY on the statement that is put before them.

    I think the landlord could (and should) now get a CCJ against the tenant.
    0
    0