Deposit dispute....please help!

aca101

I moved into my an apartment in December 2011 and paid a security deposit of €500. I moved out of this apartment in July, before I moved out I emailed the landlord notifying him of my need to move out (lost my job), he got back to me and we agreed that I would serve 1 month's notice and would pay rent up to the end of that 1 month, which I did. He agreed to the 1 month notice and never mentioned anything about the deposit.

I have contacted the landlord several times in relation to the deposit but he is saying to me now that he will not return it as it took him several months to find a new tenant. He is saying that there was a 10 month lease in place and hence he is entitled to hold the deposit in lieu of the remaining rent. I definitely did not sign a lease agreement but I may have received one by email (I can't find it however). I know the lease agreement would be the key factor in this dispute. I definitely didn't sign the lease and never acknowledged receipt of it to the landlord at the time I paid the deposit and first month's rent. I'm wondering does the fact that I paid the deposit and rent lead to an implicit agreement to the lease terms (which I may have received)?

I'd really appreciate any advice you guys can give me to let me know if I am entitled to my deposit back?

Thanks

silja

A ten months lease is an odd length. Did you ask your former LL for proof (copy or email or scan of signed lease?).

ABajaninCork

A 10 month lease is unusual to say the least. I've never heard of this. 6, 12 or 18 month leases, yes but not a 10 month one.

Did you get a receipt for the deposit? Has there been an inventory taken and agreed by both parties? Was your notice written or did you just verbally inform the landlord?

If it was a verbal notice, then I'm afraid it looks bad. No proof and the landlord can claim notice was never properly served.

You can of course open a dispute with the PRTB, but it is a very slow process.

EDIT: Just noticed you e-mailed the landlord. My bad! Is your tenancy registered with the PRTB? If not, I would venture to say the landlord's not tax compliant either. You may like to gently advise him that you will be opening a dispute if he doesn't pay the deposit back within 14 days. The fact that he took several months to find new tenants is not your problem. He had adequate notice to get new tenants!

aca101

silja wrote: »

A ten months lease is an odd length. Did you ask your former LL for proof (copy or email or scan of signed lease?).

Yes it's an odd length, I told him before I moved in that I could only stay for 10 months, not for the full 12 months, but I never mentioned anything about putting a lease in place. I don't have a copy of the lease, he probably did send me one before I moved in but I definitely didn't sign it. If on the basis that I received (but did not sign) the lease, would the fact that I moved in, paid rent, etc. constitute an implicit agreement to the lease terms?

goat2

you agreed with landlord that being the one month notice, and you paid your rent for that month,
landlord is wrong, go to the ptrb and see what they can do for you, this is lousy on any landlord or any one that call themselves human, when someone loses his her job, you have rights, and you are entitled to your deposit back, as one months notice was given

aca101

ABajaninCork wrote: »

A 10 month lease is unusual to say the least. I've never heard of this. 6, 12 or 18 month leases, yes but not a 10 month one.

Did you get a receipt for the deposit? Has there been an inventory taken and agreed by both parties? Was your notice written or did you just verbally inform the landlord?

If it was a verbal notice, then I'm afraid it looks bad. No proof and the landlord can claim notice was never properly served.

You can of course open a dispute with the PRTB, but it is a very slow process.

I didn't get a receipt for the deposit but it was paid by bank transfer, so there's a record of it. The notice was by email and agreed with him.

The other thing is, not sure if it matters or not, but when he first listed the room on daft after I had moved out, he looked for €550. This is €50 more than I was paying. He reduced this to €500 after a few weeks but still no one took the room for another 6 weeks or so.

goat2

you have it in writing then, having the email to prove that you both agreed to the one month notice,
the house being vacant for six weeks has nothing to do with you, it is his business to fill it,
report this person for this to the ptrb, how do you know if you are not the first person he withheld the deposit from,
he is wrong.

ABajaninCork

aca101 wrote: »

I didn't get a receipt for the deposit but it was paid by bank transfer, so there's a record of it. The notice was by email and agreed with him.

The other thing is, not sure if it matters or not, but when he first listed the room on daft after I had moved out, he looked for €550. This is €50 more than I was paying. He reduced this to €500 after a few weeks but still no one took the room for another 6 weeks or so.

Doesn't matter. His fault he's a greedy git who asked too much money, not yours!

odds_on

I have said it before and I'll say it again: Landlords sometimes agree to a tenant breaking a fixed term lease but fail to say that in this case, the deposit will not be returned.

Much of your defence will come down to exactly what type of lease you have and as it was verbal, it may be difficult to prove.

If you have a Fixed Term lease, you are breaking it and therefore liable to lose your deposit.

If it can be established that you did not have a fixed term lease and that it was therefore a Periodic or Part 4 tenancy, then you can give 35 days (as you have been in occupancy for more than 6 months but less than 1 year) written notice and your deposit must be returned excepting for rent arrears or damage in excess of normal wear and tear.

djimi

If you did not put pen to paper then you are not on a fixed term lease. Provided you gave the appropriate notice as laid on in the part 4 tenancy then you are entitled to your deposit back (less any deductions for damage etc of course). The landlord can argue all they want; the bottom line is that they have absolutely nothing legal to back them up. You are liable for the rent only for the month of your notice; what happens after that is the landlords own problem. If they wanted the protection of a years tenancy then they should have gotten a signed fixed term lease.

odds_on

djimi wrote: »

If you did not put pen to paper then you are not on a fixed term lease. Provided you gave the appropriate notice as laid on in the part 4 tenancy then you are entitled to your deposit back (less any deductions for damage etc of course). The landlord can argue all they want; the bottom line is that they have absolutely nothing legal to back them up. You are liable for the rent only for the month of your notice; what happens after that is the landlords own problem. If they wanted the protection of a years tenancy then they should have gotten a signed fixed term lease.

A Fixed Term lease agreement may be verbal - there is no need to have a written fixed term lease. However, if there is no written lease (which usually acts as the rent book) then the landlord must supply a rent book. Furthermore, it can be difficult to establish what the terms and conditions of an oral contract are.

djimi

How do you prove an oral contract? Surely if it comes down to a PRTB dispute the first thing they will do is ask for proof of the fixed term lease, which obviously isnt going to happen with an oral contract.

odds_on

djimi wrote: »

How do you prove an oral contract? Surely if it comes down to a PRTB dispute the first thing they will do is ask for proof of the fixed term lease, which obviously isnt going to happen with an oral contract.

Witnesses

That is the problem with oral contracts - similar to landlords/agents saying at a viewing that things will be put right - when things go well, no problems but when things go badly, a written contract is, IMHO, invaluable.

I do know of landlords who do not believe in written leases as they say they are not worth the paper they are written on as tenants seem to be able to break them without consequences. Not my view.

aca101

Thanks for all the responses guys.

So, the latest is that he has sent me on the lease this morning. It was actually a 12 month lease but I never signed it. Would there be some kind of implicit agreement on my part given that I paid over the deposit after he sent on the lease, although I never acknowledged receipt of the lease or expressed any agreement to its terms.

I've had a quick look over the lease, it's a fixed term tenancy, it mentions nothing about breaking the lease or loss of deposit arising from early termination. It just says that the deposit will be repaid by the landlord at the end of the tenancy.

He's now saying to me he'll pay me €200, "nothing more". That'd mean me losing out on €300 that I could be legally entitled to. Not really inclined to accept his offer.

ABajaninCork

I'd go back to Threshold for advice. This lease produced by the landlord could've been issued at any time, and you never signed it. I'm not sure of the form here, but I'd get further advice before you open a dispute with the PRTB.

Is the tenancy registered?

djimi

aca101 wrote: »

Thanks for all the responses guys.

So, the latest is that he has sent me on the lease this morning. It was actually a 12 month lease but I never signed it. Would there be some kind of implicit agreement on my part given that I paid over the deposit after he sent on the lease, although I never acknowledged receipt of the lease or expressed any agreement to its terms.

I've had a quick look over the lease, it's a fixed term tenancy, it mentions nothing about breaking the lease or loss of deposit arising from early termination. It just says that the deposit will be repaid by the landlord at the end of the tenancy.

He's now saying to me he'll pay me €200, "nothing more". That'd mean me losing out on €300 that I could be legally entitled to. Not really inclined to accept his offer.

If you never signed the lease then ignore it; it means absolutely nothing unless he can prove that you acknowledged it at the time you moved in.

I agree with ABajaninCork; at this point your best bet is to contact Threshold and get advise from them about the best way to proceed.

djimi

odds_on wrote: »

Witnesses

That is the problem with oral contracts - similar to landlords/agents saying at a viewing that things will be put right - when things go well, no problems but when things go badly, a written contract is, IMHO, invaluable.

I do know of landlords who do not believe in written leases as they say they are not worth the paper they are written on as tenants seem to be able to break them without consequences. Not my view.

Surely it would have to be some kind of independant witness for this to hold any water? How often would that ever happen? If they were going to go to that much hassle it would be easier just to get the tenant to put pen to paper.

odds_on

djimi wrote: »

Surely it would have to be some kind of independant witness for this to hold any water? How often would that ever happen? If they were going to go to that much hassle it would be easier just to get the tenant to put pen to paper.

Some landlords do not understand the legal way is ultimately the easiest way. Landlords are supposed to be professionals (though some are unwilling landlords and do not know the full implications of the RTA 2004) and should cover themselves from all angles in case of a claim with the PRTB.

djimi

The mind boggles...! As a landlord you are running a business; its amazing how many of them fail to grasp this concept!

myshirt

Had a quick glance through this thread.

Without getting into detailed law on it, you more than likely were in a deemed tenancy. Paying monthly, so a months written notice is fine.

You are entitled to your deposit. You just have to be firm with these people. Don't be a pushover.

I can tell you, there's no way in hell he'd be walking with my deposit

In any event, a bit of advice in general - No matter what the length of the lease do one of two things to ensure you get your deposit:

Claim part 4 tenancy after 6 months; notice period thereafter is 1 month, or;

Offer in writing to sublet the place, and suggest in your own words that you have some 'less than reputable' characters to go in there.

If they refuse a part four, or to allow you sublet, you can surrender the lease.

Or end by mutual agreement like you did. This landlord has some brass neck to try hold onto your deposit.

odds_on

myshirt wrote: »

Had a quick glance through this thread.

Without getting into detailed law on it, you more than likely were in a deemed tenancy. Paying monthly, so a months written notice is fine.

You are entitled to your deposit. You just have to be firm with these people. Don't be a pushover.

I can tell you, there's no way in hell he'd be walking with my deposit

In any event, a bit of advice in general - No matter what the length of the lease do one of two things to ensure you get your deposit:

Claim part 4 tenancy after 6 months; notice period thereafter is 1 month, or;

Offer in writing to sublet the place, and suggest in your own words that you have some 'less than reputable' characters to go in there.

If they refuse a part four, or to allow you sublet, you can surrender the lease.

Or end by mutual agreement like you did. This landlord has some brass neck to try hold onto your deposit.

Sorry, myshirt, your post is full of errors and incorrect in many ways.
Paying monthly, so a months written notice is fine. You must give the notice period as required, depending on the length of time in occupancy as set out in the RTA 2004.

Claim part 4 tenancy. A tenant does not have to "claim" a Part 4 tenancy - it is acquired by right, after 6 months in occupancy. At the end of a fixed term tenancy, the tenant can enforce this right to remain in the property by advising the landlord that he wishes to remain in occupation.

notice period thereafter is 1 month. Notice periods depend on the time in occupation.

you have some 'less than reputable' characters to go in there. Any replacement tenant in an assignment may be vetted by and must be approved by the landlord.
In a sub-let situation, the "head tenant" vacates the property and becomes the landlord of the new tenant. The head tenant is liable to the landlord of the property for any rent and/or damage to the property.

myshirt

odds_on wrote: »

Sorry, myshirt, your post is full of errors and incorrect in many ways.
Paying monthly, so a months written notice is fine. You must give the notice period as required, depending on the length of time in occupancy as set out in the RTA 2004.

Claim part 4 tenancy. A tenant does not have to "claim" a Part 4 tenancy - it is acquired by right, after 6 months in occupancy. At the end of a fixed term tenancy, the tenant can enforce this right to remain in the property by advising the landlord that he wishes to remain in occupation.

notice period thereafter is 1 month. Notice periods depend on the time in occupation.

you have some 'less than reputable' characters to go in there. Any replacement tenant in an assignment may be vetted by and must be approved by the landlord.
In a sub-let situation, the "head tenant" vacates the property and becomes the landlord of the new tenant. The head tenant is liable to the landlord of the property for any rent and/or damage to the property.

I won't get into the intricacies of it... for this OP's circumstances, you are wrong on the first point.... dr. google or a read of the RTA doesn't solve everything... and I'm not interested in educating you at this time... the OP can go with the sentiments and thoughts of the whole thread if they are of any benefit; they are given on a friendly surface level and practical mindset; ultimately to get a solid answer the option of going to a solicitor is open.

On the second point... in that scenario you may have to compensate the landlord. Generally you would set out in writing that you wish to exercise Part 4 rights.

The third point you are mostly correct - the idea was in terms of a practical approach... it is much cleaner for the landlord just to let you go on your way... dare be confronted by equality legislation or ultimately having to throw good money after bad when they get the house back in an appalling state, and minus 12 months rent..

djimi

myshirt wrote: »

I won't get into the intricacies of it... for this OP's circumstances, you are wrong on the first point.... dr. google or a read of the RTA doesn't solve everything... and I'm not interested in educating you at this time... the OP can go with the sentiments and thoughts of the whole thread if they are of any benefit; they are given on a friendly surface level and practical mindset; ultimately to get a solid answer the option of going to a solicitor is open.

I would actually like for you to educate us on this one please. The OP is on a part 4 tenancy and as such is bound by the notice periods set out within, which in this case happens to be a month (35 days to be exact). Where is it written, in relation to a part 4 tenancy, that the notice period can be the same as rent payment period?

myshirt wrote: »

The third point you are mostly correct - the idea was in terms of a practical approach... it is much cleaner for the landlord just to let you go on your way... dare be confronted by equality legislation or ultimately having to throw good money after bad when they get the house back in an appalling state, and minus 12 months rent..

Any landlord who has the slightest clue about tenancy laws will know full well that they only have to agree in principle to reassigning the lease, but that they have say over who takes over the lease, and they are well within their rights to refuse any potential tenants that the leaseholder may bring along. Equality legislation or whatever doesnt come into it; if the landlord doesnt want to rent to you then he doesnt have to.

Im not sure what you mean by the last line either; surely the landlord would be much more at risk of that happening if they rented to someone that they didnt like the look of?

myshirt

@djimi

I'm studying for a professional accountancy exam today, but I will put up a full reply with citations and case law for you after the weekend. Few interesting articles on Westlaw and Firstlaw if you want to search them in the interim..

djimi

Please do, Id be very interested to read them.