Tenant has sent solicitors letter demanding deposit back.

Tenant into 2nd yr of registered tenancy. Lease re signed after first year. Was alerted to fact that he was keeping Labrador! in small apartment. Pets are prohibited in lease. Agent sent letter to tenant stating problem and requesting that it be removed within 14 days as it was breaking agreement. After this time, agent called to tenant who decided to leave rather than getting rid of dog.. We did not return the deposit as we considered correct procedure had been followed after lease broken and tenant left unexpectedly quickly in the end.. This tenant is non national, and today we received solicitors letter requesting that we return deposit. Grounds: Lease was signed in agents office (in presence of interpreter) without allowing legal opinion. Also, vague accusations of us not dealing with problems that occured during tenancy - untrue-. I assumed that if he had problem, he should have contacted PRTB. Solicitors letters unnerve me!! Any advice? Thanks

Also, vague accusations of us not dealing with problems that occured during tenancy - untrue-. I assumed that if he had problem, he should have contacted PRTB. Solicitors letters unnerve me!! Any advice? Thanks

Click to expand...

If I lived in rented accommodation and had any problems my first port of call would be the landlord (the man in charge) if I could lay my hands on him after that it would be the letting agent.

TimorityK1 - Take a look at this link,
you might find soemthing useful there

http://www.thepropertypin.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=34089&p=445603&hilit=landlords+deposit#p445603
Threshold reports almost 1,000 illegal evictions last year

What notice did the tenant give you on leaving? What notice was required in the lease? Did the dog cause any damage?

Was it a fixed term tenancy or a periodic (mth to mth) tenancy that was signed? A written notice of termination must be served by tenant giving 42 days notice as they were in occupancy for between 1 to 2 years (if it was periodic).
If it was a fixed term tenancy the tenancy should last for the duration unless there was a breach of landlord obligations. Tenant had option to request assignment or subletting but I assume did not exercise this option. You as landlord have an obligation to mitigate the losses (in rent) and re-let the property as soon as possible. Depending on how long it takes to re-let will determine whether all/any of the deposit is due as a refund to the tenant.
Personally, I would not worry about the Solicitor stating that no legal opinion was sought. It was the second signing of the lease, I assume it was a standard lease and no-one forced the tenant to sign. In any event, the legislation with regard to termination procedure, notice periods etc ... is very clearly laid out in the Residential Tenancies Act 2004. If there was no written lease in place, the procedure is still the same - it is the law. The solicitor is aware of this and if they are not then they should be.
If there were problems during the lease the tenant should initially contact you to rectify the problems - not the PRTB.
This may well end up as a complaint to the PRTB so you need to follow correct procedure, keep written records etc...

Tenancy was fixed term and lease had been signed for second year. Tenant left about one week after receiving letter to get rid of dog. Was actually paid up for another two weeks, so leaving was unexpected. We actually got new tenants fairly quickly afterwards and so only lost out on about a week or two's rent. I am not the type of person who can "rest easy" with any sort of thing like this hanging over me, so I think we'll approach tenant and return portion of deposit rather than waiting for it to go to PRTB. Thanks to all tho' for info and advice. Much appreciated.

Can I just ask did you honestly think the tenant was going to get rid of their dog as opposed to move out? I don't understand why you didn't just issue a termination of tenancy letter immediately rather than give him another option, he broke lease.

He will pay the race card and win. Offering anything will be seem as a sign of weakness.

He did break lease, and I could toughen it out, but I feel it wouldnt be worth the hassle. The people involved have got "brass neck" and even tho I feel that I am entitled to keep deposit.. Its one added fight I feel i could do without.. Anyway, I'll let you know the conclusion and thank for interest.

I think that you would have been entitled to keep his deposit if you lost out financially by not being able to find new tenants quickly. But as you did actually find them, you should return a portion of the deposit. Keep the money you lost by having no rent for a week or two, and return the rest.

Though you say, the tenant left when the place was paid for two more weeks? If you found new tenants during that time, you should just deduct the cost of finding them, if any, and return the rest of the deposit.

I may be wrong but it's my understanding that security deposit is there to compensate the landlord for financial losses suffered through tenants' fault - lost rent, damage to property etc. If you didn't actually suffer any financial loss, you are not entitled to keep his deposit.

If you haven't done anything wrong then you should take a case to the PRTB against the tenant for not giving you notice and for any rent that may be due in relation to same. Even if you are not interested in any money (and you're not much out of pocket) if you go throught the correct procedures, and the correct procedure in landlord tenant disputes is to go through the PRTB, you put the tenant on the wrong foot. The PRTB will be the decision makers. His solicitor should have advised the tenant to go through the PRTB first and therefore I would be suspicious of both tenanat's and solicitors actions.