Letting agent unwilling to release deposit to me?

Letting agent unwilling to release deposit to me?

8:45 AM, 7th June 2018, About 6 years ago 23

Text Size

I have two properties in Wales. One I manage myself and the other, up until now has been managed by a letting agent.

I decided some time ago to take over the management myself and duly gave 3 months notice to the letting company that I wished to do so. At that time I also informed them that I would like to hold the deposit and put it into my own scheme.

This seemed fine at the time and they agreed to this, getting my tenant’s agreement that the deposit could be held in my scheme.

I received the last month’s rent from the letting agent yesterday, but no deposit monies. I have telephoned them to ask where it is and they say they will not release the money to me until I have registered the deposit with my own scheme and given them proof that I have done this.

Can anybody advise me whether this is right?

Firstly I have not received the money so how can I register it with the scheme?

Secondly the deposit amount was £675.00 – if I was using a custodial scheme are they expecting me to pay the money over out of my own funds?

Rosanne


Share This Article


Comments

Chris @ Possession Friend

21:43 PM, 10th June 2018, About 6 years ago

Reply to the comment left by Michael Barnes at 10/06/2018 - 15:35
Indeed Michael, the way I see the deposit dealt with often by agents and landlords is that, - say the agent has an account with DPS, as does the landlord, the agent just asks DPS to transfer it to the landlords account.
Deposit Always stays stays protected.

Marie

10:05 AM, 11th June 2018, About 6 years ago

Reply to the comment left by Chris Daniel at 08/06/2018 - 14:48
In reference to previous complaint on this matter.

This happened to us and I was told to register the deposit without the deposit.

https://nearlylegal.co.uk/2018/06/too-soon-2/

“Our thanks to Sally Blackmore of Ely Place Chambers for her note of this deposit case, which unaccountably slipped past us at the time (a year ago). The issue is the effect of the landlord providing the prescribed information before a deposit has actually been received.

The parties aren’t named, nor is the court (though I’m guessing Barnet County Court). But the facts are as follows.

This was a possession claim based upon a s.21 notice. The tenant defended, and sought summary judgment, on the basis that the landlord had not complied with section 213(6) Housing Act 2004, as the prescribed information had not been provided to the tenant and any relevant person ‘within the period of 30 days beginning with the date on which the deposit is received by the landlord’ – s.213(6)(b) – thus no s.21 notice could be served, under s.215 HA 2004.

The deposit was to be provided for the tenant by London Borough of Barnet. On the landlord’s account, LB Barnet required the landlord to satisfy certain matters before the money for the deposit would be released. These matters include that the council must be shown a deposit protection certificate and evidence that the prescribed information has been given to the tenant.

(We’ll pause for a moment to note that this doesn’t entirely make sense. There is no way that a deposit protection certificate can be provided before the deposit has been received and registered. Unless the landlord is also fibbing to the protection scheme. But no matter, as it is the prescribed information that concerns us here.)

Whatever the actual facts of the matter, it was common ground that the prescribed information was given to the tenant, but before the landlord had received the deposit.

The District Judge held that the wording of s.213(3) and (5) meant that parliament had intended that the deposit should be protected and the prescribed information given to the tenant after the deposit had been received. Providing the prescribed information before the deposit was received by the landlord was not ‘within 30 days beginning on the date’ the deposit was received.

It followed that the s.21 notice could not be served and the possession claim was dismissed on summary judgment.”

Chris @ Possession Friend

11:27 AM, 11th June 2018, About 6 years ago

Reply to the comment left by karin melbye at 11/06/2018 - 10:05Begs the question of 'was a formal complaint' made against the council for insisting Landlord breached the regulations, and seeking compensation, with recourse to [the feckless] LGO ?
Anyway, its a landlord who has ultimate decision on whether to accept the tenant ( thereby relieving the council of their more expensive alternative accommodation costs ) For example, Council will always offer a landlord a 'Paper bond' instead of a money deposit, its by the Landlord standing firm and refusing this, knowing the L.A has access to discretionary housing fund, that wins the argument.

Leave Comments

In order to post comments you will need to Sign In or Sign Up for a FREE Membership

or

Don't have an account? Sign Up

Landlord Tax Planning Book Now