Tenant using deposit as last month's rent - without permission!

Carbon125

The problem is mentioned in the thread title. Can anything be done about this? Is it even worth getting the PRTB involved - I imagine they will be merely wagging a finger at the offender and telling him not to do it again in the future?

Gatling

Carbon125 wrote: »

The problem is mentioned in the thread title. Can anything be done about this? Is it even worth getting the PRTB involved - I imagine they will be merely wagging a finger at the offender and telling him not to do it again in the future?

Basicly tenant is saying I'm not paying you take it from my deposit

ted1

With the lack of escrow in this country and high proportion of landlords taking the piss with regards deposits who would blame them

murphaph

ted1 wrote: »

With the lack of escrow in this country and high proportion of landlords taking the piss with regards deposits who would blame them

What is the proportion then?

Eric Cartman

ted1 wrote: »

With the lack of escrow in this country and high proportion of landlords taking the piss with regards deposits who would blame them

Ive never known anyone in rented accommodation to get even half their deposit back, using it as the last months rent while you move out is the only real way to get it back.

El_Dangeroso

Carbon125 wrote: »

The problem is mentioned in the thread title. Can anything be done about this? Is it even worth getting the PRTB involved - I imagine they will be merely wagging a finger at the offender and telling him not to do it again in the future?

Can you demand an immediate inspection of the property to ensure the deposit will not be needed?

If they refuse to pay for any damage above wear and tear then you will have a case for the PRTB.

Pawwed Rig

You need to send a letter to the tenant of a 14 day notice of arrears. If they do not pay in that timeframe you can send a notice of termination of the tenancy (but advisable to get legal advice as it can be a tricky area).
Realistically though there is not a whole lot you can do other than refuse a reference or chase through the PRTB for any outstanding amounts owed at the end of a tenancy.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Ive never known anyone in rented accommodation to get even half their deposit back, using it as the last months rent while you move out is the only real way to get it back.

I've gotten my full deposit back from every house/apartment I have ever lived in. Generally I don't hear of people losing their deposit without a valid reason. And if there is not a valid reason then it is a simple process to recover it through the PRTB. Much easier for a tenant than a landlord.

ted1

I know more people to have problems getting the full deposit back than I know who got there's back hassle free. So it's over 50%
Landlords think they can charge a couple of hundred for cleaning and do it themselves . This is not allowed.

They also tend to forget what is acceptable wear and tear.

Pawwed Rig

ted1 wrote: »

Landlords think they can charge a couple of hundred for cleaning and do it themselves . This is not allowed.

They also tend to forget what is acceptable wear and tear.

You are correct. That is not allowed which is why you ask for invoices. If not provided then you make a claim to the PRTB. Simples

I think you missed this

murphaph wrote: »

What is the proportion then?

Thinking it is 50% is not very scientific. Can you post a link where we can verify your data?

Carbon125

ted1 wrote: »

With the lack of escrow in this country and high proportion of landlords taking the piss with regards deposits who would blame them

Tenant hasn't paid the rent on time even once. It is he who is taking the piss.

And it is tenants like him that lead to invasive tenant screening.

Thanks for your most insightful comment, ted1.

JenL

Maybe you could have a chat with them and ask to inspect the place and if its not in good condition speak to them about what you think it will cost to bring back up to scratch besides normal wear and tear. With the amount of dodgy landlords out there they probably don't want to be left high and dry without return of their deposit if they think the house/apt is in good condition. Also they have probably put aside the rent they were meant to pay you for their deposit on their next place. Have a chat before making any moves through the prtb ( which by the way takes months to get anything done)

ted1

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

You are correct. That is not allowed which is why you ask for invoices. If not provided then you make a claim to the PRTB. Simples

I think you missed this Thinking it is 50% is not very scientific. Can you post a link where we can verify your data?

PRTB is far from simples, especially if a deposit and months rent is needed for a new place. An escrow system should be introduced

Joe Hart

Realistically there is zero you can do and zero repercussions for the tenant bar losing out on a good reference.

gurramok

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

You are correct. That is not allowed which is why you ask for invoices. If not provided then you make a claim to the PRTB. Simples

Thats all fine and dandy but simply that doesn't work in practice as it can take a full legal process up to a year and over to get the deposit back especially when there is a dispute. Not helpful for a tenant when that person is in the right(not this case according to LL) in the dispute against the landlord and who needs the money straightaway for the next place to rent.

Basically there are alot of rogue landlords and tenants operating in a defunct system which needs a serious overhaul to satisfy both parties fairly.

earlytobed

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Ive never known anyone in rented accommodation to get even half their deposit back, using it as the last months rent while you move out is the only real way to get it back.

Really? I've never had to withold deposit money from tenants.

Pawwed Rig

gurramok wrote: »

Thats all fine and dandy but simply that doesn't work in practice as it can take a full legal process up to a year and over to get the deposit back especially when there is a dispute. Not helpful for a tenant when that person is in the right(not this case according to LL) in the dispute against the landlord and who needs the money straightaway for the next place to rent.

ted1 wrote: »

PRTB is far from simples, especially if a deposit and months rent is needed for a new place. An escrow system should be introduced

Contact your local TD. This is a relatively new system so overhaul is not going to happen.
An escrow system? Do you honestly think we have the competence in this country to manage that effectively? It would be handed to the PRTB to manage:pac:

gurramok wrote: »

Basically there are alot of rogue landlords and tenants operating in a defunct system which needs a serious overhaul to satisfy both parties fairly.

That is true but the consequences are much more severe for landlords rather than the tenant.

gaius c

ted1 wrote: »

With the lack of escrow in this country and high proportion of landlords taking the piss with regards deposits who would blame them

Two wrongs don't make a right. Nonsense like this would justify landlords looking for two months rent as deposit instead.

Mr.Wemmick

gaius c wrote: »

Two wrongs don't make a right. Nonsense like this would justify landlords looking for two months rent as deposit instead.

There's only one unprofessional nonsense in the world of renting and that is: the deposit being in the Landlord's possession. It should be in an independent bank account and only released on the signature and agreement of both LL and tenant.

If you have been living in rented accommodation with a Landlord who has not cared about any problems you have had, been rude or ignored you then it is safe to say your deposit will not be returned to you in full, if at all.

For the last few years, I have not paid my last month's rent. I do, however, make sure the Landlord has inspected the property with me 2 weeks before the final date so we can discuss what needs to be repaired or has been already fixed by me etc. I arrange for what ever needs doing, agreed by both me and LL, pay for it, clean to a better standard that I found the place..and the LL is informed every step of the way in the run up to the end of tenancy and, needless to say, LL is happy.

My last LL was a really nice guy, but really forgetful. I literally had to drag him around the house to make him check everything, even make him measure the oil tank to show him I am leaving more oil than when I arrived. No way was I spending months chasing him for the deposit.. I would have got it back eventually, maybe 6 months later.. but not without lots of hassle.

Devi

Tbh op I've did this twice, mainly because the landlords were dicks and I knew it was the only way I'd get it back.

Pawwed Rig

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

There's only one unprofessional nonsense in the world of renting and that is: the deposit being in the Landlord's possession.

It is literally the only security a landlord has on a tenancy. Other than that they are open to all sorts of damage/arrears/hassle. And if you think that is the only 'unprofessional nonsense in the world of renting' I would suggest you have not much experience of renting. You are looking at things in a very black and white manner. Lets just agree that some landlords are dicks aswell as some tenants.

Mr.Wemmick

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

It is literally the only security a landlord has on a tenancy. Other than that they are open to all sorts of damage/arrears/hassle. And if you think that is the only 'unprofessional nonsense in the world of renting' I would suggest you have not much experience of renting. You are looking at things in a very black and white manner. Lets just agree that some landlords are dicks aswell as some tenants.

The deposit should only be used to dispute legitimate problems that have arisen not wear or tear or cleaning bills.. the fact is LLs used the deposit to suit themselves, easy to do as it is in their possession and the honest tenant finds themselves out of pocket and face months of hassle to get it back. The system as it stands is wholly weighted in favour of the LL.

If the deposit was held in a separate a/c and only released once disputes are settled then it would be fair to both parties. If that is your idea of black and white, then you need to read my post again.

I have rented for years both in Ireland and abroad so guess you're wrong again.

djimi

I completely agree; all deposits should be held be a third party. It is not the landlords money; at no time during the tenancy should they have any access to it until it is either required for a legitimate purpose or so that it can be handed back to the tenant.

Wils110

How is the landlord to recover costs on damage if the tenant expects his deposit to be used in this way,scummy tenant IMO

Pawwed Rig

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

The deposit should only be used to dispute legitimate problems that have arisen not wear or tear or cleaning bills.. the fact is LLs used the deposit to suit themselves, easy to do as it is in their possession and the honest tenant finds themselves out of pocket and face months of hassle to get it back.

Cleaning bills are a legitimate expense.
LL's cannot use the deposit to suit themselves as it is covered by legislation. An appeal to the PRTB will result in the tenant getting the money owed to him in 100% of the cases.

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

The system as it stands is wholly weighted in favour of the LL.

Now that just is not true. Look at the judgements section of the PRTB website and look for cases where deposits were withdrawn.
http://public.prtb.ie/disputes2012.htm

From PRTB documentation on deposit retention

'and while the level of such disputes is equivalent to 1% of tenancies, a similar percentage to that in England, Wales and Australia but lower than in New Zealand, such disputes account for a significant proportion and a growing percentage of disputes handled by the PRTB.'

So we are talking 1% of tenancies?? Hardly the huge problem you are describing. Lets say 50% of these are genuine so we are talking .5% of landlords illegally withold deposits! Hardly a national scandal and where they do it is relatively easy to recover cash.
Source http://public.prtb.ie/DownloadDocs/Study%20on%20Deposit_Retention_Scheme_Submitted%20to%20PRTB%2021%2009%2009.pdf

Solair

You also have to remember that a lot of tenants don't go to the PRTB. I know plenty of people who've walked away from deposits.

PRTB complaints will grow as a consequence of more awareness of its existence and also because people are more strapped for cash.

A lot of disputes are also resolved without going to the PRTB by simply explaining that you will be going to the PRTB so, I'd say the figure of 1% is pretty conservative to say the least.

listermint

Wils110 wrote: »

How is the landlord to recover costs on damage if the tenant expects his deposit to be used in this way,scummy tenant IMO

Scummy or burned in the past ?

Ive been burned on my last agreement, the place was in better nick when i left it than we we arrived. I should have known a wagon in Jodhpurs driving a range rover in the city wasnt to be trusted.

Was going to go through PRTB but to be honest it was too much bloody hastle for 300 Euro. Just dont have the time with work and that to be chasing some wagon down.

djimi

Wils110 wrote: »

How is the landlord to recover costs on damage if the tenant expects his deposit to be used in this way,scummy tenant IMO

Unfortunately I can see both sides of the arguement. I dont condone holding the last months rent as a way of getting a deposit back, however there are a lot of cowboys out there who will simply steal your money, and to most tenants that deposit money is required in order to move into their next property; they cannot afford to wait months to get it back, and/or risk not getting it back at all.

As much as I hate phrasing it as such, the system is at fault here. The reason tenants feel the need to take such measures is because of the large numbers of landlords who look to rip them off (and Im not saying that every landlord is like this, or even the majority, but there are enough out there for it to be significant). The fact that the deposit system is self controlling by landlords is what causes these issues; take it out of the hands of those who would wish to abuse it and we would have a fairer system for everyone.

Pawwed Rig

listermint wrote: »

Scummy or burned in the past ?

Doesn't matter if they were burnt in the past. They are still breaking the law.

Solair wrote: »

You also have to remember that a lot of tenants don't go to the PRTB. I know plenty of people who've walked away from deposits.

PRTB complaints will grow as a consequence of more awareness of its existence and also because people are more strapped for cash.

A lot of disputes are also resolved without going to the PRTB by simply explaining that you will be going to the PRTB so, I'd say the figure of 1% is pretty conservative to say the least.

If they can afford to walk away from deposits then good luck to them but then don't complain next time. The PRTB has been around for years. A simple query on the internet will throw up tonnes of advice on what to do if a landlord witholds your deposit so to but it down to awareness is disengenuous.
If you have a better source quoting a higher percentage please share.

listermint wrote: »

Was going to go through PRTB but to be honest it was too much bloody hastle for 300 Euro. Just dont have the time with work and that to be chasing some wagon down.

Again if you are happy to write off €300 that's up to you. Not sure why it should affect your next landlord.

josip

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Ive never known anyone in rented accommodation to get even half their deposit back, using it as the last months rent while you move out is the only real way to get it back.

Our last tenant got his full deposit back. He got the place cleaned by a cleaner at his own expense prior to moving out. I had to replace some broken things afterwards, but they were minor, eg. blinds pulley, rad TRV valve, shower hose.

gurramok

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

If they can afford to walk away from deposits then good luck to them but then don't complain next time. The PRTB has been around for years.

Withdrawing last months rent is the only way to afford to walk away from a deposit. Nobody will owe anyone anything(unless there is severe physical damage).

Handing over the last months rent results in very long wait in alot of cases for the deposit to be given back even without PRTB intervention, the tenants cannot afford to wait that long. Reform of the system will help all involved.

Pawwed Rig

gurramok wrote: »

Withdrawing last months rent is the only way to afford to walk away from a deposit.

No it's not

gurramok wrote: »

Nobody will owe anyone anything(unless there is severe physical damage).

Not necessarily true

gurramok wrote: »

Handing over the last months rent results in very long wait in alot of cases for the deposit to be given back even without PRTB intervention

Generalisation

gurramok wrote: »

the tenants cannot afford to wait that long.

Generalisation

gurramok wrote: »

Reform of the system will help all involved.

Will it? If tenants are ignoring the current legislation why do you think they won't ignore reformed legislation?

I think you need to read the thread as you seemed to have missed alot of the points that are being discussed.