Deposit being withheld

Deadlie

Hello all,

I moved out of my apartment on July 31st, fulfilling my one-year fixed term lease with the landlord and letting agent. I lost my job in May and since then I struggled to pay the rent. I paid it every month without fail, though.

Prior to moving out, I spent 2 months trying to get the rent allowance sorted, but despite having everything on my end ready for Intreo (the new HSE place in my area dealing with rent allowance), the letting agent drip fed me information. I still have not received all the information required to fill out the forms - he withheld the final piece of information and said I could collect it when I came in to sign a new lease.

During all this time I emailed the letting agent, asking for the information or the contact details of the landlord. I was sent the wrong numbers, or was told 'The information wasn't on headed paper, so i couldn't forward it to you', etc. It would have been laughable if it wasn't so serious.

As a result of this messing about, I said that if I didn't have all the information by July 7th, I would have no option but to move out. He sent me two wrong pieces of information - one a photograph of a form on the Saturday.

I contacted him on the 16th, 19th and 24th looking for anything, but received no reply. I decided that after all this waiting, that I would move out. He clearly didn't want me there.

So I cleaned the house. I left it in a better condition that I found it and on the 27th I told him I was moving out. He came to inspect the property and said that the Landlord has the option to hold onto a percentage of the deposit because we didn't give enough notice.

I thought my notice was me telling him if I didn't have the required documents by a given date, I'd *have* to move out. I can't see how he saw this as a shock.

He claims the PRTB are on his side, and when I rang them they said they couldn't give advise - but Threshold could. Threshold seem to side with me, but say the interpretation of 'notice' is up in the air in cases like this and it'd come down to a PRTB dispute, most likely.

I'm not sure what or if you guys can advice/suggest/point me in the direction of, but I'm pretty bummed about all this and feel I've done nothing wrong to warrant this!

D3PO

you didn't give correct notice your statement that if I don't have info by x date im moving out is not a valid way to serve notice.

whilst any rational person would accept it and not be an arsehole the letting agent clearly is not, unfortunately however they are most likely to win any dispute raise to the PRTB by you based on the information provided.

beeno67

If it was a one year lease then surely the lease is the notice. The OP never asked to stay beyond the end of the lease so as the lease terminated the op had to vacate the premisses.

Deadlie

D3PO wrote: »

you didn't give correct notice your statement that if I don't have info by x date im moving out is not a valid way to serve notice.

whilst any rational person would accept it and not be an arsehole the letting agent clearly is not, unfortunately however they are most likely to win any dispute raise to the PRTB by you based on the information provided.

How was I to serve notice? It was my first time renting.

If it was a one year lease then surely the lease is the notice. The OP never asked to stay beyond the end of the lease so as the lease terminated the op had to vacate the premisses.

This is what I thought too. He seems to think otherwise, though. I thought a year was a year and that's it - I'd have left earlier had I known I wasn't going to get it back, rather than struggle to fulfill my term there.

D3PO

beeno67 wrote: »

If it was a one year lease then surely the lease is the notice. The OP never asked to stay beyond the end of the lease so as the lease terminated the op had to vacate the premisses.

Not the case I'm afraid, primarilarly as a protective measure for tenants to stop them being turfed out of a rental after the term of a lease so as to give them security of tenure.

You are still required to provide notice that you do not intend to remain post lease and that means in writing.

D3PO

Deadlie wrote: »

How was I to serve notice? It was my first time renting.

Notice should always be served in writing.

This is what I thought too. He seems to think otherwise, though. I thought a year was a year and that's it - I'd have left earlier had I known I wasn't going to get it back, rather than struggle to fulfill my term there.

A one year lease means a minimum term of one year but doesn't mean exactly after a year you can leave.

Think of it the other way around imagine the landlord pitched up exactly one year after you moved in and told you to get out.

There has to be protections for tenants unfortunately the protection associated with leases running into Part 4 tenancies has some unfortunate side affects like in the scenario you mention.

Deadlie

Cheers all.
Devastated.

D3PO

Deadlie wrote: »

Cheers all.
Devastated.

sorry to be the bearer of bad news. That said you have little to lose by lodging a PRTB dispute and advising the letting agent of the same.

sometimes they will just bottle it and return the deposit, or you may be lucky and get judgement in your favour (although I doubt it) for the palty few quid it costs to lodge one there is no reason not to try.

Chris_5339762

They have to provide receipts though, dont they? They cant just say "too short notice served, we're keeping x amount"?

D3PO

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

They have to provide receipts though, dont they? They cant just say "too short notice served, we're keeping x amount"?

receipts for what ?? if you don't serve the correct notice period then all rent lose by vacancy up to the point of the notice period / reletting can be deducted form the deposit.

Your confusing it with the need to provide receipts for deductions due to damage which isn't the case here.

djimi

D3PO wrote: »

A one year lease means a minimum term of one year but doesn't mean exactly after a year you can leave.

Im not so sure tbh. The way that the tenancy act is worded is that you must inform the landlord of your intention to remain on a part 4 or you face penalty for any costs that they have incurred in readvertising etc. This to me suggests that the default is that you dont remain on a part 4 and you leave the property at the end of the fixed term. A fixed term is just that; a fixed term.

foggy_lad

djimi wrote: »

Im not so sure tbh. The way that the tenancy act is worded is that you must inform the landlord of your intention to remain on a part 4 or you face penalty for any costs that they have incurred in readvertising etc. This to me suggests that the default is that you dont remain on a part 4 and you leave the property at the end of the fixed term. A fixed term is just that; a fixed term.

I thought it was up to the LL to give notice if they wanted a tenant to quit as soon as the lease was up and a tenant only had to notify the LL if they wished to stay.

usernamegoes

D3PO wrote: »

receipts for what ?? if you don't serve the correct notice period then all rent lose by vacancy up to the point of the notice period / reletting can be deducted form the deposit.

Your confusing it with the need to provide receipts for deductions due to damage which isn't the case here.

If the tenant didn't serve the proper notice the LL can only charge for the costs he incurs as a result i.e. lost rent until the new person moves in.

TheDriver

Deadlie wrote: »

How was I to serve notice? It was my first time renting.



This is what I thought too. He seems to think otherwise, though. I thought a year was a year and that's it - I'd have left earlier had I known I wasn't going to get it back, rather than struggle to fulfill my term there.

Unfortunately that's also very naïve and isn't a defence except to make you feel better. Like driving a car etc, your first time you should still be aware of rules and regs and reading on here for example will tell you all of this. I agree with the poster, the LL now hasn't got a renter in place because you have left under an illusion of "might be leaving".........

D3PO

djimi wrote: »

Im not so sure tbh. The way that the tenancy act is worded is that you must inform the landlord of your intention to remain on a part 4 or you face penalty for any costs that they have incurred in readvertising etc. This to me suggests that the default is that you dont remain on a part 4 and you leave the property at the end of the fixed term. A fixed term is just that; a fixed term.

yeah this has been discussed ad nauseum on here previously, the assertion your making may be correct however nobody has ever been able to show me a PRTB tribunal that has backed up this reading of the RTA.

Add to this the OP I'm sure wouldn't be the first to lodge a PRTB complaint for this very reason and as no ruling in a tenants favour can be shown for this its fair to side with this not being the PRTB's understanding of the RTA in this regard.

Of course somebody has to set a precedent so like I said Id recommend the OP fill their boots they have little to lose.

D3PO

usernamegoes wrote: »

If the tenant didn't serve the proper notice the LL can only charge for the costs he incurs as a result i.e. lost rent until the new person moves in.

correct and if you read my posts you would see that I said the very same thing..........

Deadlie

Having just read this, I'm confused: http://www.prtb.ie/dispute-resolution/disputes/deposit-refund

djimi

From that link the following would seem to suggest that no notice is required once a fixed term has expired:

In the case of tenants, the only exception to these requirements is where a tenant of a fixed term tenancy (e.g. has signed a lease for 1 year) is ending the tenancy on expiry of the fixed term when no formal notice is required.

usernamegoes

D3PO wrote: »

correct and if you read my posts you would see that I said the very same thing..........

Sorry, I know that's what you were saying. Just wanted to make sure the OP knew you that the LL could only charge actual costs not an arbitrary cost. I would ask for a receipt of how much was taken from my deposit. I wouldn't except charges for advertising etc. As for as possible I would try to verify that the LL was reasonably fast in finding a new tenant and didn't move someone in and say it was still vacant.

Deadlie

djimi wrote: »

From that link the following would seem to suggest that no notice is required once a fixed term has expired:

Exactly. My lease had this as it's first line:

Note for Tenants
1. This is a Fixed Term Tenancy Agreement
2. The Residential Tenancies Act 2004 applies to this Agreement.

I'm struggling through the RTA, but I'm feeling slightly more optimistic. Not convinced, but it's definitely worth a punt at this stage!