11:33 AM, 3rd March 2020, About 3 years ago 6
I would appreciate your views on the following. I had a new tenant sign up for a 12 month (fixed-term) AST for a room at £550 pcm.
I gave the tenant the option of providing a deposit equal to 5 months’ rent or for him to set up an arrangement with a no-deposit scheme equal to the value of 8 weeks rent. The tenant chose the latter.
Having paid one months’ rent in advance the tenancy commenced on 7th Oct, when the time came for the second months’ rent (7th Nov) it was not received, however, the third month (7th Dec) was received via a standing order that had now been set up. The second month (7th Nov) remained in arrears. When the time for the fourth month came (7th Jan), it was not received. The tenant had cancelled the standing order.
On 9th Jan a section 8 grounds 8, 10 & 11 was served giving the tenant notice with court action not commencing before 24th Jan. The tenant subsequently left the property on 25th Jan after a check-out and signing a surrender of tenancy and agreeing to rent arrears valued at £1,100.
A claim was submitted to the no-deposit scheme and my expectation was to receive payment to the value of the 8 weeks rent (£1,015.38) covered. However, the no-deposit scheme has declared that I am only entitled to payment up to the date the tenant left quote; “the tenant vacated and surrendered the tenancy upon the expiry of the Section 8 notice which means legally his liability ended.
Rent owed is £893.56 which is one full month and 19 days at £18.08 per day, 19 x 18.08 = £343.56 + £550 = £853.56” .
Now my thinking is that as the tenant was still in the fixed-term he owes me for the maximum 8 weeks covered. The fact that a section 8 was issued was due to his failure to pay the rent. Also, he was not evicted, the tenant decided to leave before any section 8 court action, as such this was his choice.
Now I know this is just small numbers but it’s the principle applied by the no-deposit scheme that I am questioning here – your thoughts?