Not giving me my deposit back....

chicken_food

I'll try to keep this quick. Moved in Jan with my american GF and due to unforseen circumstances - she has had to go home. So we gave our notice, and moved out on paddys day. It was a 9 month lease and before we moved in the letting agent (A) told us if we need to end the lease early, just to get in touch and it would be ok. Now (A) has left and (B) has taken over - still same company though. (B) said that it would be ok, they would deduct the letting fee and daft fee out of our deposit. So after moving out and not hearing a word back for two weeks - I finally got in touch with (B) about getting our deposit back and she says that she won't release our deposit until the apartment gets rented again. Can she do this? When I said that wasn't in the contract-she said that neither was terminating the contract early etc. So now I am afraid she will try to get us to pay for the remaining rent, even though we've moved out and will not release the deposit untill a new person moves in.

Where do I stand in all of this??

D3PO

if the break clause isnt in your contract the only way out of a fixed term lease is to replace yourself with another suitable tennant. sounds like the letting agent is doing that part.

its perfectly reasonable, you should have ensured a break clause in your lease.

chicken_food

Does it help at all that I never received a signed copy of the lease? I signed a copy - but never received the signed copy of it.

My other point of contention is that this apartment complex is still technically a building site. A replaced front door that was left outside my front door fell on me one evening as I was leaving. Rebar poking out of the ground in the front of the building etc. The lift never worked (as we were promised) and parking was never included (despite being in the agreement).

D3PO

chicken_food wrote: »

Does it help at all that I never received a signed copy of the lease? I signed a copy - but never received the signed copy of it.

My other point of contention is that this apartment complex is still technically a building site. A replaced front door that was left outside my front door fell on me one evening as I was leaving. Rebar poking out of the ground in the front of the building etc. The lift never worked (as we were promised) and parking was never included (despite being in the agreement).

no if you have a copy or not is immaterial. you should have one but that doesnt mean the contract doesnt exist.

you moved in know the external conditions so thats again immaterial. if you were promised parking your entitled to it but its not a reason to terminate the lease not least becasue you dont even have a copy to point to the fact its inclusive in the agreement.

the lift isnt in your accomadation so again its again immaterial.

chicken_food

Ok, thank you all for your help. I gues I'll just have to wait and see what happens next. I guess it is my own fault for accepting (A) at their word and didn't really think too much about it. I feel sick to my stomach right now, because there is no way in hell I can afford this/next months rent. Not on my own.

D3PO

chicken_food wrote: »

Ok, thank you all for your help. I gues I'll just have to wait and see what happens next. I guess it is my own fault for accepting (A) at their word and didn't really think too much about it. I feel sick to my stomach right now, because there is no way in hell I can afford this/next months rent. Not on my own.

although they could realistically they wont chase you for any further rent. however they may not be trying very hard to fill the accomadation so as to ensure you get some money back.

Its unfortunate but cest la vie

chicken_food

I will have to re read the lease again tonight. Hopefully they are nice about it - but i have a feeling they wont be. We've had so many problems since moving in that havn't been dealt with. Part of me knows she knows what she said - but we don't have its our word against a contract.

BostonB

D3PO wrote: »

although they could realistically they wont chase you for any further rent. however they may not be trying very hard to fill the accomadation so as to ensure you get some money back.

Its unfortunate but cest la vie

I don't get the logic. Why would someone not try and rent their place?

chicken_food

I presume they wouldn't have an incentive to try and rent it out - if I am already paying the rent on the place and not living there. Not worth the hassle.

Having handed over the keys yesterday to a 'consultant' who works for them - his advice is just to not answer phone calls and insist they email me instead. If I've given notice, then don't worry and don't pay. They won't bother with the hassle of going to court etc - but I will lose my deposit. He said, alot of the time they go back to the contract and fight it out with you just so they get to keep the deposit too. although it was nice to hear, I still don't feel like that is the right course of action. I will see what today brings first.

D3PO

BostonB wrote: »

I don't get the logic. Why would someone not try and rent their place?

Im not saying they wont try.

Look at it thid way. The EA essentially has rent for next month so the dont have the same incentive to get somebody in the door today as they would if it was vacant.

if for example somebody views and says yeah Im interested but not available to move in for 3 weeks. They are more likely to accept that then try and get somebody for right away knowing they have the OP's money that is legitimatly held to cover the gap.

BostonB

Any delay might mean not getting rent the next month, or the month after. Their priority has to be rented it out as soon as possible. There would be no good reason to delay.

D3PO

BostonB wrote: »

Any delay might mean not getting rent the next month, or the month after. Their priority has to be rented it out as soon as possible. There would be no good reason to delay.

yes but there is no incentive to rush either, besides which there are dozens of threads in here regarding incompetent EA's and lettings so that is a factor aswell.

Im not syaing they will delay to screw the OP Im just putting a perspective on what could happen

BostonB

D3PO wrote: »

yes but there is no incentive to rush either, ...

I don't think you get the point about having a place rented as soon as possible is the primary goal for all rental property.

D3PO

BostonB wrote: »

I don't think you get the point about having a place rented as soon as possible is the primary goal for all rental property.

I dont think you get the point that many EA's are lazy and inept and will use the situation as a reason not to put themselves in a rush to find a tennant.

Your mistake is your judging people by a normal competent persons standards. This doesnt seem to be the situation with many letting agents

BostonB

I was mainly addressing the issue of incentive to rent it out. I'd assume they get % permission per month, so that would be their incentive to rent it out as soon as possible.

That someones inept and happy to run their business into the ground through laziness, is a fair point.