Prescribed Information date works both ways – beware!

Prescribed Information date works both ways – beware!

9:36 AM, 5th February 2024, About 3 months ago 10

Text Size

Hello, During Covid, my letting agent sent the Prescribed Information (PI) to my tenant by email the night before the tenant paid his deposit and took the keys. Four years later, after issuing a s21 via the letting agent, followed by an Accelerated Possession Order prepared by my solicitor and sent to the court, the judge was not willing to uphold the order without a hearing.

The reason? The PI was not issued correctly! The letting agent, solicitor and barrister all disagreed with the judge saying there was no precedent set in law for early delivery, only late delivery etc.

Then the tenant was offered a council property (all this because the council told the tenant to wait for the bailiff) 5 days before hearing, therefore the court cancelled.

Costs for this was £2,750 in legal fees plus court fees. If the court hearing had happened I could have been fined and made to pay the tenant deposit back plus x ? rent.

The tenant never opposed s21 or the Possession Order and was only going to tell the judge he had nowhere to go until the council found him somewhere.

Why am I writing this? I investigated myself and the HM Government website clearly states to provide PI early is wrong. The TDS website has a section on not to provide PI early – I let my property out as I was not using it and wanted it back – it took almost a year, caused stress and anxiety and cost monies the letting agent would not agree to pay, even though the error was theirs.

Check your paperwork, if it doesn’t tie up you could be in trouble.

As the TDS site says, even if you think you are being helpful DON’T – it could cost you thousands.

Thank you,

Marjorie


Share This Article


Comments

AccidentalLandlord2024

10:06 AM, 5th February 2024, About 3 months ago

Thank you.

It is a real minefield, get one check list item wrong and loads of consequences.

I usually send the PI with the deposit protection certificate out in the same zip file.

TheMaluka

12:41 PM, 5th February 2024, About 3 months ago

Yet another reason why I have never taken deposits. The maximum deposit does not cover the cost of malicious damage and I cover the cost of wear and tear, cleaning etc by means of a higher rent.
I have seen too many colleagues fall foul of the deposit regulations thanks to "ambulance chaser" solicitors, even when they have done everything correctly.

JC

13:40 PM, 5th February 2024, About 3 months ago

I used to operate a no deposit model, but I found that with no skin in the game, tenants often made no effort whatsoever to clear their rubbish from a property and clean it at least.
This obviously caused a delay which impacted rental income for the landlord. We now take 4 - 5 weeks deposit which is an almost pointless exercise if a bad tenant damages a property. But what it does do in most cases, is ensure the property is almost ready for re letting when the tenant leaves.
Re the prescribed information being issued. That is a 100% error by your then agent. I dont even know how they issued that prior to registering the deposit if I'm honest as our system won't allow it.
But you should take small claims action against your former agent (£5000.00 or less.). Google moneyclaims online. It normally costs around £80.00 and the agent will receive a CCJ if they don't reimburse you.

Reluctant Landlord

14:52 PM, 5th February 2024, About 3 months ago

Reply to the comment left by JC at 05/02/2024 - 13:40
I agree - I cant understand HOW they could have issued the PI beforehand. It don't think it's possible and anyway an agent SHOULD know better than to not follow what is a well trod path.

I agree - take action against the agent. Perhaps a log a formal complaint to them, wait their final response and if they haven't offered to pay for the costs you incurred as a result of their action then off to to Ombudsman you go!

Luke P

16:49 PM, 5th February 2024, About 3 months ago

Reply to the comment left by JC at 05/02/2024 - 13:40
Take a (home owning) guarantor. With their skin in the game and something to lose, they usually have a lot of sway with tenants and I've never not been paid over hundreds and hundreds of tenancies.

David

17:10 PM, 5th February 2024, About 3 months ago

The PI is worded to assume that the deposit has already been protected. If it has not at the point of issue, then the PI will be invalid.

Dr Rosalind Beck

17:23 PM, 5th February 2024, About 3 months ago

I would have thought that the main issue for a judge would be whether the deposit had been protected within the 30 days, rather than when the PI had been issued. A positive in issuing before the deposit has been protected is that it is helping to inform and reassure the tenant at an earlier stage that their money will be held in a reputable way. As judges have discretion regarding penalties related to deposit protection, maybe they would veer towards a smaller fine if a case like this was brought - possibly making claims less likely if there's not a big pot of cash at the end of it for the lawyer and tenant so share?

David

17:27 PM, 5th February 2024, About 3 months ago

Reply to the comment left by Dr Rosalind Beck at 05/02/2024 - 17:23
Judges look at the deposit legislation in the round. If there is any breach, (and invalid PI would be such), they are compelled to find for the tenant.

Paul landlord

19:56 PM, 5th February 2024, About 3 months ago

"I agree - I cant understand HOW they could have issued the PI beforehand. It don't think it's possible and anyway an agent SHOULD know better than to not follow what is a well trod path."

Out of interest with My Deposits the PI document is fully available on the portal without having to protect any deposit at all. As it's a generic, non specific document it can be accessed any time.

I don't know about other deposit protection providers, I've never used them.

I am shocked, (though I shouldn't be), at yet more mines being left for a landlord that's just trying to do the right thing.

Used to take deposits but have avoided deposits for the most part for a while favouring just guarantors down to this sort of debarcle.

Sam B

9:49 AM, 6th February 2024, About 3 months ago

Reply to the comment left by Reluctant Landlord at 05/02/2024 - 14:52
.Hello 'Reluctant Landlord', I may be wrong but I I regarding re compensation unless the terms of service agreement with the letting agent states they take care of deposit compliance requirements. I have read a number of articles over the years that it has to be in this rather than the tenancy agreement. But then if its in the tenancy agreement it might service for compensation purposes, what would your view be?

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