RTB or Small Claims Court for withheld deposit?

RoYoBo

In the case of a withheld deposit, is it possible to seek redress through the Small Claims Court as opposed to following up with the RTB?

RoYoBo

RoYoBo wrote: »

In the case of a withheld deposit, is it possible to seek redress through the Small Claims Court as opposed to following up with the RTB?

Are you a tenant or a licensee? If you are a tenant then it’s RTB, licensee it’s SCC. The SCC excludes lease agreements, RTB deals only with tenancies, not licensee agreements

RoYoBo

The person concerned is a tenant and the landlord/agent is withholding the deposit - he seems to be totally unafraid of RTB and is effectively telling the tenant to 'bring it on'.

I'd hoped the SCC was an option in this case, as it's a tad complicated by the tenant having to make an emergency exit from the property due to rising damp/black mould and an infant with breathing difficulties. The tenant had been trying for months to get work done (she has a paper trail of utter incompetency) but didn't give official notice per se.

The RTB and environmental health were contacted for help. The RTB said keep trying with the landlord and the EH was not in a position to do tests for a few months! Finally, a doctor told the mum to remove the baby from the property as it was badly affecting the child's breathing.

dancingqueen

RoYoBo wrote: »

The person concerned is a tenant and the landlord/agent is withholding the deposit - he seems to be totally unafraid of RTB and is effectively telling the tenant to 'bring it on'.

I'd hoped the SCC was an option in this case, as it's a tad complicated by the tenant having to make an emergency exit from the property due to rising damp/black mould and an infant with breathing difficulties. The tenant had been trying for months to get work done (she has a paper trail of utter incompetency) but didn't give official notice per se.

The RTB and environmental health were contacted for help. The RTB said keep trying with the landlord and the EH was not in a position to do tests for a few months! Finally, a doctor told the mum to remove the baby from the property as it was badly affecting the child's breathing.

Quite a sticky situation, in any case, you can't leave a property without proper notice - was the required notice given to the landlord?

RoYoBo

dancingqueen wrote: »

Quite a sticky situation, in any case, you can't leave a property without proper notice - was the required notice given to the landlord?

No, unfortunately, the tenant threatened to leave but really wanted to stay and have the work done, so, officially, no actual notice. Baby's health came first though, so had to leave in the end.

When furniture was moved, the extent of the black mould and damp was clearly revealed. Bedding, clothing and the child's cot stank of mould and had to be dumped. She has photographic evidence, whatever that's worth, but the landlord has painted over everything since and the house is for rent again.

theteal

That's a health risk. Do they have pictures?

I'd be inclined to follow through with RTB. No tenant can be expected to live in unsafe conditions, you can't give notice in these instances. As long as it was reported and chance given to remedy, I can't see h ow they'd lose tbh.

dancingqueen

RoYoBo wrote: »

No, unfortunately, the tenant threatened to leave but really wanted to stay and have the work done, so, officially, no actual notice. Baby's health came first though, so had to leave in the end.

When furniture was moved, the extent of the black mould and damp was clearly revealed. Bedding, clothing and the child's cot stank of mould and had to be dumped. She has photographic evidence, whatever that's worth, but the landlord has painted over everything since and the house is for rent again.

It can be taken to the RTB. Seeing as she has left the property, the issue of fixing the mould is no longer her problem and the fact that the required notice was not given might mean that the deposit is retained by the landlord but you never know. Mould is a touchy subject.. you can't prove that a tenant has or hasn't been using correct ventilation in the property (blocking up vents, opening windows and using extractor fans etc.) it might be best that she cuts her losses at this stage and moves on

ELM327

If you don't follow proper process as a landlord you will lose, similar is true for tenants who leave without giving notice.
Requesting repairs does not absolve the tenant from their responsibility to pay the contracted rent.

I don't see much hope, nor should there be much hope, for the tenant getting their deposit back. Deposits are to prevent witholding rent, along with damage to property.

If I were the LL in this situation I'd follow the process for non payment of rent and pursue the tenant through RTB

RoYoBo

ELM327 wrote: »

If you don't follow proper process as a landlord you will lose, similar is true for tenants who leave without giving notice.
Requesting repairs does not absolve the tenant from their responsibility to pay the contracted rent.

I don't see much hope, nor should there be much hope, for the tenant getting their deposit back. Deposits are to prevent witholding rent, along with damage to property.

If I were the LL in this situation I'd follow the process for non payment of rent and pursue the tenant through RTB

The tenant has paid all the rent due and tried over several months to get the necessary work done. The deposit is a matter of principle now. Why would you pursue the tenant in this case? She had no choice to remain when her baby's health was at risk. Would you have stayed there with your child for another month?

The house with damp and mould is/was a health risk. Since it has only been painted over for now, it will arise again for the next tenant. The landlord used plastic cladding from the floor up to hide the rising damp on all of the gable walls.

It might be better to cut her losses, but this landlord clearly knows the issues involved and is taking advantage IMO.

RoYoBo

dancingqueen wrote: »

It can be taken to the RTB. Seeing as she has left the property, the issue of fixing the mould is no longer her problem and the fact that the required notice was not given might mean that the deposit is retained by the landlord but you never know. Mould is a touchy subject.. you can't prove that a tenant has or hasn't been using correct ventilation in the property (blocking up vents, opening windows and using extractor fans etc.) it might be best that she cuts her losses at this stage and moves on

I can certainly appreciate this viewpoint, but in this case it's definitely rising damp. A dehumidifier was bought by the tenant and she was steady emptying it, but the gable wall was always wet. The extent of the problem wasn't known before moving in as the house was newly painted and there was plastic cladding installed half way up the walls to hide the problem.

RoYoBo

theteal wrote: »

That's a health risk. Do they have pictures?

I'd be inclined to follow through with RTB. No tenant can be expected to live in unsafe conditions, you can't give notice in these instances. As long as it was reported and chance given to remedy, I can't see h ow they'd lose tbh.

Yes, they have pictures. When I became involved I advised her to take as many pictures as possible. I only saw the house when she was in the process of moving out and was horrified at the black mould and the smell. There's no way a coughing baby could stay another night there and the doctor agreed.

I hate that this landlord can get away with this, but I accept that he might anyway :mad:

Claw Hammer

If she goes to the RTB and complains about breach of Glamour and obligations, withholding of deposit she will recover her deposit plus compensation. The Landlord might be allowed some last round for failure to give adequate notice but it would be unlikely to be more than the amount the landlord is ordered to pay.