There is currently no obligation on landlords to conduct electrical safety checks similar to those relevant to gas appliances but these two articles may be very helpful if you want to encourage landlord to employ a qualified professional to check the cooker: Electrical Safety in Rental Property - LandlordZONE http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/pdf/3-Step%20Safety%20Checks.pdf

I couldn't help myself from adding to this thread, which has gone off the rails few time. I wrote a paper few months ago about benefit fraud. I wanted to tell you that the figures which quoted as "lost to fraud" do not tell the whole story. In 2003-04 DWP spent some £109 billion on a wide range of benefits, employment programmes and the associated administration costs. It estimates that around £3 billion of this expenditure may have been lost from benefit payments because of fraud and error, the same estimate as reported in 2002-03 and 2001-02 . However the figures also show that official error results in almost as much benefit being overpaid as claimant fraud. It is therefore important to distinguish the losses suffered by DWP due to error and those which are caused by fraud. This is because, in my opinion and in light of this distinction, the headlines reporting 3billion loss are skewed and sensationalist. Dean and Melrose (1995) who produced a paper “Manageable discord” found that the predominant reason for fiddling was economic necessity, inadequacy of benefit payments, lack of belief in the system and lack of opportunities. The principal preliminary findings were that those claimants that fiddled were not especially “streetwise”. The research conducted in 2004 by Spark Research for DWP discovered that fraud investigators commonly accepted admission of an overpayment as admission of intent and that the claimants are being offered a caution under threat of being prosecuted if they do not accept it. This can lead to convictions for fraud in situations where claimant couldn’t have reasonably been expected to know that they are doing something wrong! Poverty and financial need are often cited as the main reason for people claim fraudulently. CPAG’s Ten Steps to a Society Free of Child Poverty states that “safety net benefits are worth around £192 per week for a couple with children (…)- £80 less then the poverty line (£272). For a lone parent (…) the safety net is worth £160, some £29 less then the poverty line of £189” Finally, there are vulnerable claimants, who are often illiterate, confused, unable to cope with complexity of the application forms, change of circumstances requirements and renewal forms. They very often are claiming many correlated benefits, like disability or sickness benefits, together with Income Support and passported benefits. They may have a care or prison background and very limited language skills. As the DWP does not see itself as having responsibility for ensuring that such people know what benefits are available, the question is - who is? Not being able to understand what is going on with their claim, very often does not prevent claimants from being convicted of fraud. It doesn’t help that this particular group of claimants would find it very difficult to challenge an overpayment/eligibility decision; therefore they are the soft target, the easy statistics. “Recent organisational change and the plan to shed a quarter of its workforce, possibly lowering morale and increasing turnover among the staff whose skills are most needed to combat fraud and error, will not make the Department’s job any easier.” These are comments made by Mr Edward Leigh MP, Chairman of the Committee of Public Accounts and contain, in my opinion, the other then fraud reason behind the large-scale losses suffered by DWP- an error made by the decision maker. Common sense tells us that dissatisfied, disillusioned staff are bound to make mistakes. It is widely known in a welfare advice sector, that plenty of overpayment appeals are won for clients on grounds of an official error. It is difficult to establish how much money exactly is lost through an official error, how much of it is recovered and how much is not recoverable. Additionally, we will never know, how much would not have been recovered if the claimant was able to appeal the original decision, instead of agreeing meekly with the overpayment decision. Mr Leigh talks about high level of error by staff making benefit payments costing the department estimated £1.5 billion a year. An example of the scale of losses due to an error as opposite to fraud was made by Kate Nash, Chief Executive of RADAR who said: “In reality, fraud among people claiming Incapacity Benefit accounts for less than 2% of the Department for Work and Pension’s total expenditure on benefits. Fraud accounts for no more than £20m, with over £90m being wasted through errors that are not the fault of claimants.” So, a massive 3 billion pounds leaks out of the DWP’s benefits budget. Most of this loss is preventable and at least half of it has nothing to do with “benefit cheats”. It would however be a political suicide for the department to admit it. The “scroungers” are a much more convenient headline. And finally setmefree: how would you recognise between those "named and shamed" in your local paper which one of these people were elderly confused chaps who did not know that they have to report a minuscule private pension? An illiterate 16 year old single mother who was never able to get an advice because she was embarrassed that she cannot read? What about a very sick person who had to cope with fantastically complex application forms on his own because the government cut the funding for advice sector to the bone? All these people, thanks to the way "fraud" procedures are set out, would be technically fraudsters. There is hundred of thousands of them. Your poor local paper would go out of business if they had to print even 1% of these names. I am not angry at your question. I just sought to clarify few things for those who are ignorant.

It's never simple with you Scots

I would write to the manager of the branch and cc it to headquarters. Collect the £300 but give the a receipt of sorts on which you clearly state that you accept the money as a partial settlement and you expect the outstanding amount of £200 in 14 days. Give this to them once you are holding the cash in your hand. Do not accept cheques- or send a "receipt" once a cheque has cleared. If they want to sign a receipt of their own, make sure you'll get your own copy and scribble your own rearks on it (as above, that this is partial blah blah). Or opposite- they may want to dig their heels in. £200 is not poxy and you must be careful to behave in a reasonable, "willing to co-operate" manner. Refusing to collect £300 may frame you as "difficult".

On what grounds would you advise sisternumber1 to appeal? Absolute bollox. This is the information about TRS The Rent Service (TRS) - frequently asked questions - FAQs You are very angry Albrecht, aren't you? I was just wondering how is this relevant to OP. One thing it's certain however- much more research is needed; outrage and anger do not make good welfare specialist.

well, dependable Mr Freaky

blast, my bad, I haven't asked for your location. There must be something similar in Scotland though?

Write a formal letter demanding money back. They have taken a double payment for the same service. Give them 14 days to respond. If no response or if rejection- write again; entitle the letter LETTER BEFORE ACTION. Summarise your demands and tell them that you will ask the court to issue summons in 14 days. Familiarise yourself with money claim online. Issue claim bang on time- let the know you mean business. Did you find out if the agents belong to a professional association like ARLA etc? If you lose, you will not end up in trouble, the worse case scenario: loss of £200 and a court fee. You are not responsible for other party's costs. I am sure someone here could help with checking your particulars of claim but you really don't need to try too hard or use legalistic phrases. https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/csmco2/index.jsp Fees

great advice MTM

Similarly, the landlord may not be able to prove that you were in this property and this bills are yours at all! What could stop him making up an imaginary person and telling the utility companies a fake name? What evidence has he got that you were living there? H M Land Registry will, for a fee of £3, send you a copy of the Register Entries for the property you rented, which may show that this address belongs to the landlord. Land Register Online Show this to the landlord and tell him that this document will be forwarded to the debt collectors if he doesn't come up with half of the money. Don't write to the landlord- talk to him on the phone etc. As for students living in the property; the council will not take it seriously as students are obliged to send to the council as Council Tax Exemption Certificate. If council doesn't have the certificate, they will pursue whoever they think lived there.

If this is a joint tenancy, any changes will affect all joint tenants. If the landlord decides to give the notice, he will terminate the tenancy for both of you- which is fine, providing that he will immediately offer you a new tenancy. The problem may arise if the other tenant will not leave (the landlord can't touch him without court order) or if the landlord decides that you are now responsible for the entire rent- at least till you find a house mate. Why not move out yourself? Are you at Southampton Uni? If so, why not pop down to the Student Union and check if they have advice service? Most SUs do and they are usually pretty good.

Very happy for you! Now you are an owner-occupier! Brilliant! You are aware that finances are going to be tighter because there is no help with housing costs (well, some help mortgage interest if you are in receipt of Income Support for a while) but I am sure having your own roof over your head is worth a little sacrifice

FLWLSW- excellent post, absolutely correct.

In order to sue someone, this person has to have an address in UK. You will definitely need to sue a landlord; doesn't matter if the agency run things- your contract was with a landlord. If you still have the tenancy agreement, there should be a clause there with an address at which "notices" can be served. This should be UK address. You can use it to write to and then in your money claim application. Also, in case you haven't already read it, this post has some helpful hints about finding landlord's address http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/residential-commercial-lettings/117572-unfair-deposit-deductions.html#post1188882 This post talks about enforcing judgent :http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/residential-commercial-lettings/116744-got-judgment-how-get.html#post1173717

Hello didi: I need to clarify few things. You shared paying of the bills with a flat mate. When you received these bills for last time before you've left, you gave them to the landlord. Why did you give them to your landlord? The bills were all in your name and now you are being chased by debt collectors. You are asking how can you prove that you have moved at a specific date from the property. Is this because you believe that some of the bills were for the use of utilities after you've left? It seems also that nobody paid for council tax and you believed that the landlord would pay, because he said so. You think that the guy you were sharing with left some money for the landlord to pay these bills- is this why you want the landlord to pay half? If you are having serious difficulties with your English, there is a very helpful French person here: Bookworm. If you need her help, we can ask her for some assistance.

It is always acceptable to furnish the court with as much information as possible. What is the worst thing that can happen? The court will reject it but then you are back to the same position as now and can apply to change the name of the defendant.

Both of you signed the document, correct? Technically then the fee of £50 should be taken from both of you. It is outrageous and absolutely disgusting that they have decided to do so, seeing as they did not even had any chance to carry out required checks but there you go, that's why estate agents are on the bottom of the pile when it comes to least trustworthy jobs. So this is how I see it: £200 holding deposit which relates to one property and £50 per person who signed the application form. By the way: I know you were keen but are you crazy handing out £800 before the checks are carried out or before you are 100% sure?

No.

adridude; I am sorry, please don't think we are shrugging our shouldres as if we don't care. We are usually passionate about rights of tenants, lodgers etc. But in your circumstances there is really nothing we can say to give you answers that you want.

"How much notice", not "from when to when" notice. You were given a month notice, you were not entitled to a "month notice which has to expire at the specific period"

This is flogging a dead horse adridude. You have received answers from us and from Shelter. We've seen the contract and we have heeard that the landlords lives with you and shares common parts of the property. You are an excluded occupier. Period. We are now getting into minute details and this is not helpful. What would be more helpful is a frank discussion with your landlord; can you stay for few more days seeing as you have paid for it or not? If not, then it's B&B or mate's sofa for few days, although I know that is would be a nuisance. I think further digging would not magic a way out for you.

Hello sparky; few question, which may allow me to answer you. How old are you? are you going to attend a college of further education? Are you in receipt of benefits now, and which ones? Lone parent? Disabilities? You can claim HB as a full time student if you are 19 or over if you are in one of the groups: in receipt of IS/JSA; lone parent; pensioner; students with disabilities(this one is complex you may need specialist advice); if your partner is also a student and you have a child, if you have a partner who is not a student (the partner would have to make claim). The college that you are going to may have an advice service or welfare office. They should be able to help you further as this is their bread and butter.

Deposit; standard deposit action as described in a http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/residential-commercial-lettings/117572-unfair-deposit-deductions.html#post1188882 combined with TDS action as described in http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/residential-commercial-lettings/117280-tenancy-deposit-scheme.html#post1184266 The success of your case will depend on a quality of evidence that you have or the landlord doesn't have. If you are a student, your Student Union should have an advice centre. Give it a go; some SU advice centres are really good. Move fast, so you can be first to start the court action. Read up other posts here on TDS. Be prepared; it will all entail some paperwork, but step by step you'll get there.

My post does not maybe apply to your situation entirely but i wanted to point your attention to Shelter's link and possibly their helpline number.

What do you meand by "slipped in"? Did they amend the contract after it was agreed and signed by all parties or was it there from the beginnning and you have the original copy with this term present? If the latter, then you have answered your own question, as quoted above. Unfair terms are terms which cause unequal distribution of rights and obligations betwen parties. This is well explained here: Consumer Direct - Unfair terms in contracts I am not saying that your case is hopeless but it would be good to discuss it with a solicitor, Consumer Direct or Community Legal Advice