To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Deposits are a safety valve for landlords
Share this:
From John Mattioli.
IN defence of at least 99.9 per cent of landlords, a deposit is the only tangible safety measure that landlords have to protect their properties from the many unscrupulous tenants.
Mr Le Gresley (JEP, 23 June) obviously has no idea of what some landlords have to contend with, and his referral to the 250 complaints to come down to a handful will most probably end up with many hundreds of disputes and litigations involving third parties as well. His two quoted complaints bear very little credibility as being submitted only by the words of the two tenants, apparently without the landlord’s version of the facts and with no investigation to find out the real truth.
To be verifiable, these complaints should also have been accompanied by a schedule of conditions with photographs and the signed agreement of conditions by both tenants and landlords with the inclusion of fair wear and tear wording.
Without considering the additional burden for extra manpower needed, if the deposit safety valve is taken away from the landlords, the landlord-tenant relationship will be badly disrupted if not in chaos. Consequences in the housing market may also befall.
Mr Le Gresley is also incorrect in relation to the average deposit of £905, if he included lodging houses, as most lodgers have two weeks’ deposit averaging £250 per unit or a maximum of £150 per person. Even with the exclusion of the tenants’ deposits, £10 million is a long way from the £600,000 that all the current 4,000 lodgers could only provide.
Would it not be a lot easier for all if Mr Le Gresley and CAB would consider concentrating more of their efforts in verifying the tenants complains, challenge the landlord in question and, if found at fault, request payment back to the tenants or expose the landlord to the media or to a higher authority if the culprit persists or does not comply?
I am sure that no landlord in Jersey would risk tarnishing his or her name in any way because all landlords are compelled to be fair with their tenants as they could not survive without them.
Greensleeves,
Bon Air Lane,
St Saviour.
Related