This is perhaps obvious but I can't get a clear answer from my reading.
In general my procedure has been as follows:
a) Three months before the and of a tenancy agreement I ask T if they are likely to wish to stay on.
b) If the answer is no, I issue S21. If the answer is yes, I create a simple new 1 page AST importing all previous terms apart from notice periods and rental amount, and I pay to re-protect the existing deposit. If the answer is yes but the T does not want a new AST, I either issue S21 or accept SPT depending on my mood.
The problem arises that sometimes merely with the passage of time the deposit becomes disproportionately low vs the rent, or T caused damage or expense for which they are liable but which is held over to a "final" deposit reduction.
Is there any reason deposits cannot be "crystallised". In other words repay deposit with reductions to date, document this for each party, redo the inventory, and take a fresh and different deposit with an entirely new AST (or a simple one listing variations).
Any pros or cons I am missing?
If I did do that, would it be permissible to do a virtual money transfer - ie. a payment of the difference based on the difference in deposit size and any deductions (I am with mydeposits), or do an actual refund and a new receipt (a potential step where dangers might lie).
Usually this doesn't matter much, but in one instance now, agreed damages at renewal amount to the entire deposit. Effectively I have no deposit but am happy for the tenancy to continue with appropriate protections. I would be inclined to issue S21 and act upon it if T does not agree to restore the deposit.
If I do create an entirely new tenancy (new AST, new deposit, entirely new agreement with the same T) do I lose the usual right I would have to attempt termination of a tenancy before the 6 month point, which I would have with a usual renewal?
In general my procedure has been as follows:
a) Three months before the and of a tenancy agreement I ask T if they are likely to wish to stay on.
b) If the answer is no, I issue S21. If the answer is yes, I create a simple new 1 page AST importing all previous terms apart from notice periods and rental amount, and I pay to re-protect the existing deposit. If the answer is yes but the T does not want a new AST, I either issue S21 or accept SPT depending on my mood.
The problem arises that sometimes merely with the passage of time the deposit becomes disproportionately low vs the rent, or T caused damage or expense for which they are liable but which is held over to a "final" deposit reduction.
Is there any reason deposits cannot be "crystallised". In other words repay deposit with reductions to date, document this for each party, redo the inventory, and take a fresh and different deposit with an entirely new AST (or a simple one listing variations).
Any pros or cons I am missing?
If I did do that, would it be permissible to do a virtual money transfer - ie. a payment of the difference based on the difference in deposit size and any deductions (I am with mydeposits), or do an actual refund and a new receipt (a potential step where dangers might lie).
Usually this doesn't matter much, but in one instance now, agreed damages at renewal amount to the entire deposit. Effectively I have no deposit but am happy for the tenancy to continue with appropriate protections. I would be inclined to issue S21 and act upon it if T does not agree to restore the deposit.
If I do create an entirely new tenancy (new AST, new deposit, entirely new agreement with the same T) do I lose the usual right I would have to attempt termination of a tenancy before the 6 month point, which I would have with a usual renewal?