Bingo! So how do I persuade them to do some work...?

I agree with you - but they didn't see it that way when I spoke with them last week. They would rather sit back and receive our rent for another six months - to be fair, that is what we signed a contract to do!

Hi mariner, Thanks for your reply. There's nothing (I think) to indicate tenant activation of break clause. See text below. When we signed for another 12 months we weren't planning on buying a house this year! We rent through Intermediate Rent so there are minimum and maximum household income levels. Break clause - We can send you a break notice in the form of a notice requiring possession under s21 giving you two months' written notice to end the tenancy at the end of the notice period. At the end of the notice period we will be entitled to apply to court for an order to gain possession of the property. - We will only send a break notice if we have reasonable belief that you are in breach of the terms of your tenancy, which would enable us to gain possession of the property relying on any of the relevant grounds for possession set out [below]. It references this section: - The tenant shall remain a fixed term assured shorthand tenant for the duration of the tenancy so long as he occupies the property as his only or principal home. - While you are a fixed term assured shorthold tenant, we can end the tenancy by getting a court order for possession, either because we have served you two months notice under s21, or under Schedule 2 of Housing Act 1988 - If the tenancy ceases to be an assured shorthand tenancy, the landlord may end the tenancy by giving one month's notice in writing to the tenant. Regarding other residential property, it says: - We have granted you a tenancy of this property on the basis that at the date your tenancy started and at any other time during the tenancy you will not have access to any alternative residential property. - In signing this agreement you confirm: -- you are using this as your only and main home -- you do not own or have a mortgage on a residential property elsewhere -- you will not rent, buy or take out a mortgage on another residential property while you are our tenant - we will treat it as a breach of this tenancy if you do -- you will tell us if you later gain any interest in another residential property - we may treat it as a breach of this tenancy if you do not tell us. I think those are the relevant items in the agreement. It does also mention that we are not permitted to assign or sub-let the property in its entirety, and that subletting one room to a lodger could not be for "commercial profit". Thanks to anyone who can give me a steer on all this...! The passage in bold seems to imply some certainty that we are about to breach our agreement - which would be good news for us I think

Hi all, I rent a flat from a housing association in London. I am in the process of buying a new-build house which will be ready in January 2016, but our tenancy is a 12 month AST which runs until July 2016. We therefore need to leave before the end of our tenancy. The tenancy agreement grants the landlord a break clause but not the tenant. I spoke to the property manager recently and they are unwilling to let us surrender the tenancy early. We're going in person to meet them on Tuesday and I would like us to come to an amicable agreement. I understand that legally speaking, we are liable for rent until the end of the tenancy or until a new tenant is installed in the flat (whichever is sooner). Our AST states that if we purchase a property during the tenancy the landlord will treat it as a breach of tenancy. Furthermore, that we must use this flat as our only or main home. It does not permit us to assign or sublet the flat. It says that the landlord "may" repossess the flat if we break our tenancy agreement in these ways. I'd like to understand what the ramifications of us leaving the tenancy early are. I will argue that if they agree to let us surrender, we will help to re-advertise the flat and find a new tenant, and hence they will have no void period. But if they don't agree, we will probably leave anyway, return the keys and formally abandon the tenancy. At this point, I understand that a landlord should/must take reasonable steps to re-advertise the flat and find a new tenant, and that our liability to pay the rent ceases at the point they do. We would also be liable to pay any reasonable charges they incur - all of which I am happy to do. Another alternative is to sublet the flat in breach of our agreement. I think we could find sub-tenants quite easily but obviously becoming a landlord myself for five months or so introduces another layer of risk to the probable eviction etc.! I'd be very grateful for any advice or experience from you, so that I can come to a good agreement with the landlord over the next few weeks. Many thanks.

We won! Had our hearing this afternoon. The landlord didn't turn up, but the judge accepted our case and awarded us our full claim: - return of the deposit - interest on the deposit from start of tenancy + 10 days until now - three times the deposit - court fees The landlord's defence was to have paid a cheque into our bank account last Friday - but it didn't clear in time so we went ahead anyway. I'd recommend this to others in the same situation. Beware though, as if your landlord protects the deposit, even after the end of the tenancy, then you're likely to lose your case for compensation. The landlord may apply to have the judgement set aside but we'll know in the next couple of weeks. Thanks everyone for your advice and help!

We won! Had our hearing this afternoon. The landlord didn't turn up, but the judge accepted our case and awarded us our full claim: - return of the deposit - interest on the deposit from start of tenancy + 10 days until now - three times the deposit - court fees The issue I mentioned above about the cheques was OK in the end. The cheques will only clear tomorrow so we haven't definitely received anything yet. The judge did mention that had the landlord protected the deposit before the court case he would have won. The landlord may apply to have the judgement set aside but we'll know in the next couple of weeks. Thanks everyone for your advice and help!

I'm in a similar situation - any advice appreciated! We moved out of our old flat in Feb 2010. Landlord never protected the deposit, and didn't pay it back. We threatened legal action and eventually submitted N208 in July. We stated in our letter before action that we would from then on not accept the repayment of only the deposit as full and final settlement. Our hearing (having been adjourned twice) is on Wednesday 17 Nov. We've just had our share of the deposit paid into each of our bank accounts. Does this mean that the landlord is no longer "the person who appears to be holding the deposit", or have we effectively refused this payment in advance because of our letter before action? Of course we're still out of pocket with court fees and interest, but it would be nice to pin this landlord with a judgement to show him he can't steal thousands of pounds from his tenants... Thanks in advance for any help! Chris Edit: forgot that I posted details of my case here before. Click on my username (I can't add links to my post) and the thread will pop up...

I submitted my N208 claim today, claiming for the deposit plus interest, three times the deposit as compensation, and court fees. My (anonymised) claim wording is below, if anyone would like to borrow it. I took most of the wording from the template kindly posted online by someone more knowledgeable than me (sorry, I forget who). The Claimant claims under section 214(1) of the Housing Act 2004 that the deposit of £1860 required by the tenancy agreement originally dated [sTART DATE] in respect of the premises at [ADDRESS], made between the Claimant and the Defendant was not paid into an appropriate tenancy deposit scheme (in breach of section 213(1) of the Housing Act 2004); or that the Claimant was unable to confirm from the Scheme Administrator of any tenancy deposit scheme that they held the deposit in accordance with the scheme (in breach of section 213(3) of the Housing Act 2004). And the Claimant asks that the court make an order:1. That the person who appears to the court to be holding the deposit do repay it to the Claimant, in accordance with section 214(3) of the Housing Act 2004.2. That the Defendant do pay to the Claimant, within 14 days of the making of the order, a sum of money equal to three times the amount of the deposit, in accordance with section 214(4) of the Housing Act 2004.3. The Claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year, from 10 February 2008 to 7 July 2010 of £358.87 and interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £0.41.The Claimant is therefore seeking payment of £7440, plus the court fees and interest. The Claimant encloses copies of: the Assured Shorthold Tenancy Agreement signed on [sTART DATE] relating to the above named premises; the receipt from the Letting Agents of the deposit; a letter sent in March 2008 relating to the lack of inventory provided for the property, and thus that no deductions from the deposit would be accepted; a letter received from the Letting Agents in January 2010 confirming that the Defendant is holding the Claimant’s deposit; confirmations from each of the three Government-approved tenancy deposit protection schemes that they did not hold the deposit for the above named premises for the entire length of the tenancy; letters and emails sent to the Defendant requesting information about, and return of, the deposit. The Claimant additionally requested the return of the deposit on numerous other occasions by telephone since the end of the tenancy, with no repayment forthcoming despite repeated promises to the contrary by the Defendant; the Letter Before Action sent on 25 June 2010 and the email from the Defendant received on 3 July 2010 acknowledging its receipt; the Notes for the Defendant.

Hi all, This forum seems to be a knowledgeable place for tenancy deposits. I’d appreciate any comments on our case. Three of us moved into a property in January 2008. We renewed the tenancy a year later, and moved out in February 2010. We paid a deposit on moving in of £1860. We never received any information from the landlord, the agent or any of the protection schemes. Since moving out the landlord hasn’t repaid our deposit. It was only when I did a bit of reading around the subject that I came across the Housing Act 2004 and the liabilities of landlords towards their tenants’ deposits. I have written (email) confirmation from each of the three deposit protection schemes that they have never protected any deposit from us. I served a letter before action to the landlord, the time limit on which has now expired. The landlord has acknowledged receipt of the letter and seems to be a bit scared at last. A few specific questions: - if he returns our deposit at this point can I continue with court action against him? I’m not the vindictive type but this man has pushed my patience. - when we moved in my father acted as my guarantor as I was still a student. When we renewed the contract in January 2009 there was no new credit check. Does this affect anything? - one of our flatmates moved out in May 2009 and we replaced him with a friend who paid the old tenant his deposit. Does this affect anything? I’ve read the threads about a current High Court decision which is pending. I suppose waiting for the outcome of that case might be instructive. Thanks for your time. Chris