How unreasonable is it to not pay the last month's rent if you paid a deposit equal to the rent?

[Rentergirl]

I used to be naive enough to think that the agent was a go-between. No not at all! There have been a few issues with things that broke, fell off, fell down, were bottom of the range etc.... I quickly got the message that the agent gets their commission from the client, and the client is the one who counts. So I felt bullied at times. eg, 'warned' by the agent that there wasn't much else out there that I could afford and that I shouldn't complain so much.

I have never been more than a day late with the rent. But when I go I won't pay the last month's rent. I will advise them by email that my deposit can be the last month's rent. I will leave the place clean and tidy because I'm not an arsehole.

I don't need a reference. I will put my hard hat on now and prepare to be blasted. Or not. ???

That seems weird taht you don't get the deposit back..... is it because the tennants want the deposit as WELL?

OP considers them a 'trade' so she wouldn't be disputing it so I guess her landlords would get the deposit back. I'd no idea it was so complicated.

My last but one tenants didn't pay the last month's rent. The agreed it with the agent without consulting me. I was spitting feathers, with the agent for agreeing this. There had been damage, that the agent knew about, that had to be billed to them seperately. I did get the money, but that wasn't the point. I had no idea that no rent was going into the bank that month, but still had mortgage and insurance etc. to pay out.

YANBU, I used to do that quite a lot. Far easier and I knew I hand't damaged anything so there was no need for them to keep the deposit.

OP considers them a 'trade' so she wouldn't be disputing it so I guess her landlords would get the deposit back. I'd no idea it was so complicated

It won't matter what OP considers it in a court of law.

does the court seriously have the time to indulge landlords who behave like this,,, have their house left perfect and go all legal ?

It's a funny old world.

minimum lease is six months. Why do tenants stay for longer in properties that are clearly substandard, with dodgy landlords, and then complain about it months or years later?

Don't give money to dodgy landlords who rent duff properties. It's not hard.

does the court seriously have the time to indulge landlords who behave like this,,, have their house left perfect and go all legal

Yes the courts have time. That's what they're there for - small claims.

If the house is left fine, the tenant will have their deposit returned to them.

I would do what you plan, and good luck to you!

"If the house is left fine, the tenant will have their deposit returned to them. "

I'm not sure that that is the case, and going to the small claims court costs money I bet.

Are you aware of the length of time it takes for a LL to actually get hold of the deposit once the tenants has left? Particularly if the tenant ignores the process, which I suspect you would do. It takes a good couple of months - and how are the mortgage and insurance to be paid in the meantime?

It may be that your LL is exploitative, OP, but I can't see that your suggested course of action is any better.

"And this is exactly why almost all deposits now are 6 week's rent rather than a month."

Quite. Flipping cheaters.

YANBU

If you know that nothing is broken or damaged then your landlord will not be out of pocket, but he will be denied an opportunity to rip you off over the deposit.

Although you will have technically breached the contract, your landlord would have to show he had lost out from the breach in order to pursue it through the courts. Which, in this case, he won't have.

Just go for it- presumably you need it to cover the deposit for the next place.

If the house is left fine, the tenant will have their deposit returned to them

I'm not sure that that is the case, and going to the small claims court costs money I bet

It's been the case for every tenant I've ever had. This one is the only one to cause damage. Also, the only one to withold rent. The others have all had their deposit returned in full.

It only costs £80 to make a small claim and the tenant has to pay it if the court rules in favour of the landlord, which, in my case, they did. It's a really simple process, you can do it online, we didn't even need to go to court.

Although you will have technically breached the contract, your landlord would have to show he had lost out from the breach in order to pursue it through the courts. Which, in this case, he won't have

This is pretty bad advice if the deposit is at all in dispute. If the rent is due on the 1st of the month (as in OP's case) and should be paid a month in advance, this means that by the end of the tenancy, the rent will already be one month in arrears. So obviously, the landlord has lost out. This is what the LL claims for. It's nothing to do with the deposit.

The best advice would be to pay the rent when it's due and then, if there is no damage to the property, the DPS will return the deposit to the tenant at the end of the tenancy.

Why do you want to risk a CCJ against you OP? Do have reason to think that you won't get all of your deposit back?

I would take Fairenuff 's advice, they are correct in what they have said.

If you don't want a CCJ against you that is.

If you're not bothered then take your chances.

I think it's a pretty awful thing to do really. You agreed to the rental cost for a set period.

I said right at the start, the landlords are elderly and a bit deluded about this property. It was really shabby when i moved in. Tiles have fallen off the wall. Because they painted over paint over paint over paint, it has cracked and falled off the wall leaving a different colour underneath. The sink plug fell apart in my hadns and the little screw went down the sink, so I have replaced it with a normal sink plug. The letter box flap fell off but I just got home one day and it was gone. I didn't knock it off or break it. I presume somebody sticking a flier in broke it and just chucked it rather than push it in through the letter box. That's it really. But the landlords have been spectacularly INtransigent about every reasonable request that I've made since the day I moved in. I asked that one piece of huge furniture be removed. NOPE. 'you saw it when you moved in' I was told. I asked the agent to reason with them, and was told in no uncertain terms that the owner is the client as the commission comes from the owner.

When I said the shower didn't work probably I was more or less told I must be wrong because it was new. When I went back to the agent about it I was told that I was lucky to have this place. as there wasn't much else for rent in the area (there's not much else it's true but all the same i've found somewhere). I didn't have to show a reference. The guy said he'd no interest in what the agent thinks of me. I showed my bank records to demonstrate that I have paid rent on time every month. That was enough for him. Perhaps he doesn't think too highly of the other agent.

I will probably pay the deposit and leave the place spotless and hoovered and with all odds and ends gone, and they will say, oh, a tile has falled off the wall, the paint has cracked and the wall paper has peeled and teh sink plug is different so you're not getting your 850 back.

Ahem, if you HAVE NO INVENTORY, THEY CAN'T TAKE A PENNY OFF YOU!

ffs, does ANYONE ever bother to read?

You don't need to have an inventory to take part in the tenancy deposit protection scheme. Damages and expenses can be taken as outlined in the lease.
It makes everything easier if there's an inventory but it's wrong to say they can't hold on to part of a deposit or all of it, without an inventory. They can.

Rentergirl, if your tenancy is in a protection scheme then you need to agree to the landlord keeping it or it goes to arbitration. If your deposit isn't in a protection scheme then the landlord has to pay you compensation.

(the link below is about the fact you don't need an inventory to take part in the scheme)

Inventory Info

ISeeSmallPeople have you been through a dispute process with the tenancy deposit scheme? How high was the burden of proof? I'm genuinely interested as I've never had a dispute about a deposit (either when renting or as a landlord).

Inventories are NOT a legal requirement, tenancy deposit schemes are.

If there is no inventory, the LL can't prove shit anything.

You can take the LL to arbitration with, or without an inventory.

Bottom line, that money is YOURS, if the LL wants some of it, they have to prove, beyond all doubt that they are owed it.

If they can't do that, the tds will not give it to them.

And yes, only if the property was in brand new condition, WITH RECEIPTS, could a LL be anywhere near as strong a position the op's in.

I just thought it was interesting you were mentioning the inventory when it's not even a requirement of the scheme. It seems odd that something that seems to be a cornerstone of any dispute is not a legal requirement of the scheme.
ISeeSmallPeople, everything I've heard has been the same as you ie that burden of proof is higher on the landlord but I don't know anyone who has been through the process yet. All the landlords and tenants I know have had amicable resolutions to their tenancies