I think that means you can enforce against the agent in that case. I had a similar case last year, over deposit protection rather than reclaiming rent though. But my overseas LL and UK based LA were both named as defendants and when I won the case I was able to enforce against the LA who eventually paid up. If you do a search for threads I started you will find the details of how I did it and the advice I was given at the time. Good luck!

What sort of tenancy did he have? Was it an AST, or was he a lodger?

Even if the six months is up, even if there are arrears, the landlord cannot force entry like this. There are procedures to be followed and failure to do so constitutes illegal eviction and harrassment. Your friend has no need to negotiate anything. The landlord MUST serve the correct notice and after that has expired he still cannot force entry - he would need a court order before he could do so.

He has no need to leave at all. The landlord can only gain lawful possession of the flat if he gets a court order - it appears he has not done so, and so he has NO RIGHT to order your friend out. The police will attend and will tell him so if your friend phones them. I also suggest he rings Shelter asap for some expert legal advice.

No they cannot do this! If they try to force entry he must call the police.

I am not sure who is at fault to be honest, though the general view is that the ultimate responsibility lies with the LL. Your LL is the person named as such on the AST agreement - so in this case the wife. However, I have recently won a TDS case plus 3x penalty against my former LA, even though he claimed to be acting on a let-only basis. I would send a letter before action to both LL and LA stating your intention to bring court proceedings for full return of deposit plus 3x penalty unless it is returned within 14 days. If it isn't, then issue court claim with both LL and LA as defendants and let the judge decide who bears the responsibilty.

Well done! Regarding enforcement - I applied for an 'order to attend court for questioning' on LA when he failed to pay within a month. This means they must attend court to be questioned in detail about finances (and provide proof of all accounts, mortgages etc) so you can decide how best to enforce. In my case, the court bailiff went to serve the order on LA whom promptly handed over a cheque for the full amount.

You don't need to photo the house or prove anything - if the LL wants to make deductions it is their responsibilty to prove the case. The deposit is YOUR money unless he proves he is entitled to any of it, which without any evidence he can't do. Unless I am missing something, I'd say to issue N208 for return of deposit plus 3x fine for non-compliance. The renewals post April 2007 mean you have a good case - I won on these grounds as have others. The Govt. guidance is quite clear on how the law is intended to work - if a renewal AST was signed after April 2007, the deposit should be protected. I will PM you details of my case. I think the fact you are no longer tenants doesn't matter, he is retaining your deposit without good cause.

"What happens if the tenant has a tenancy agreement that was taken out before 6 April 2007 but he continues occupying the property after the end of that tenancy? If the tenant decides to remain in his existing rented property beyond the initial fixed term of six months, how the deposit is treated will depend on how the tenancy is continued: For a statutory periodic tenancy - ie the tenancy continues with no new agreement - TDP will not apply, as no new AST will have been created. For a replacement/renewal tenancy - This is a new AST and so TDP will apply. The deposit previously paid under the earlier tenancy is repayable to the tenant at the end of that tenancy, so it should be returned to the tenant. Alternatively, if the landlord wishes to continue to hold it as security in respect of the new tenancy it must be protected under scheme." (taken from Treatment of deposits at the end of the tenancy - Housing - Communities and Local Government ) That is the Govt guidance relating to pre-2007 deposits. I know lots of people consider it a bit of a grey area and there are opposing views on here and elsewhere, but I went in with the approach that as the law isn't entirely clear, the best interpretation to use is the one the Govt. are making. The judge agreed with me and said it was quite clear how the law was meant to work.

Its possible that when she collected the deposit from the letting agent in order to self manage, she should have protected it then. Thats when she personally recieved it.

http://nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/2009/0...al-of-tenancy/ http://www.atro-online.com/tenancy-deposit-scheme.html http://nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/2009/0...y-award-again/ These are the judgements I provided in my claim. An S.21 served when deposit is unprotected is invalid and if they try to enforce it (either through court or 'unofficially' - they sound like charmers!) it is likely to constitute illegal eviction and harrassment. I'd suggest a letter to tell them this and to let them know the tenant has rights and is aware of them. The local council should have a 'private sector team' to deal with problems with landlords and renting - try them maybe?

I think its been explained properly and can't see anything confusing myself. The only time a periodic tenancy is not covered by TDS legislation is if it was started before April 2007 and not subsequently renewed. However this does not apply in this case as the tenancy was started in August 2007.

UPDATE - no money arrived within the time ordered so i issued an order for LA to attend court for questioning on his financial affairs to give me an idea how best to enforce. The day after this was served, he sent the court a cheque for the full amount, which is now being forwarded on to me. Thanks to everyone who advised me - I'm doing my best to help others with their cases now I have all this information sloshing round my head.

The original tenancy was created after April 2007 so it does apply. If the tenancy was created before April 2007 and then lapsed to become a periodic tenancy then TDS legislation may not apply, but thats not the case here.

Its April 2007, not April 2008, thats the important date for deposit protection. If the money was specified as advance rent then you have no need to pay for the last 2 months you are in the property - you have paid already. If the LL expects you to pay rent til you leave and then he will return the advance rent, then he is treating it as a deposit whatever he tries to call it. EDIT - I see that your LL is aware of the protection schemes and trying to avoid using one - so he can't treat the money you have paid in advance as anything other than rent.