How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Remus2004 Your Own Question
Remus2004, Barrister
Category: Property Law
Satisfied Customers: 71159
Experience:  Over 5 years in practice.
Type Your Property Law Question Here...
Remus2004 is online now

My tenant has issued a demand to pay £4800 as the deposit

This answer was rated:

My tenant has issued a demand for me to pay £4800 as the deposit was not protected. We had advised him that we could no longer allow him to extend his stay as we needed to refurbish the flat. The real reason was that:
a) he was sub letting
b) he was keeping a dog
c) he was producing commercial produce using the kitchen premises
d) he had ruined the state of the flat
We literally wanted him out so we could re do (without complaining) and re let!!
Do we have a case at all? Is it worth counter suing?
Thank you for your question. My name is ***** ***** I will try to help with this.
If this is an AST then the deposit should have been protected. he does have a claim for three times the sum of the deposit which is not likely to amount to £4800. Also, he probably will not get three times the sum.
You may as well counter claim. On your specific points
a] you have a claim for the amounts that he received.
b] this isn't really a good point unless the dog caused damage
c] a non issue as it gave rise to no loss
d] you have a claim for the cost of putting right the damage.
Can I clarify anything for you?
Customer: replied 3 years ago.

The main issue is that the contract specifically says no pets and no sub letting.

He did not advise us of either - we just know from the amount of complaints and the fact that each time agents have visited people have been residing on the premises. Do we need to collect witness statements? is that sufficient or will he have to admit it?

The commercial use - he has no licence for it? He also has increased the bills considerably which we have had to pay for. Is it therefore worth claiming now or will the court ask why we have mentioned this so late?

I'm afraid there is no point in making these points.
These are breaches of the agreement maybe which goes to whether or not you are entitled to evict.
They do not give you a money claim against him.
Remus2004 and other Property Law Specialists are ready to help you