Johnson & Ors v Old  EWCA Civ 415
The Court of Appeal has been turning its mind to another of the odd questions that has sprung from the fertile litigious bosom of tenancy deposit protection. In this case the argument was over the question of rent payable in advance.
The Law and The Problem
In s212(8), Housing Act 2004 there is a definition of a deposit as follows:
“tenancy deposit”, in relation to a shorthold tenancy, means any money intended to be held (by the landlord or otherwise) as security for—
(a)the performance of any obligations of the tenant, or
(b)the discharge of any liability of his,
… Read the full post
Ayannuga v Swindells (2012) CA (Civ) 6 November 2012. On Lawtel but not on BAILII yet.
The Court of Appeal has recently ruled on a tenancy deposit protection case regarding the issue of prescribed information. Here T had paid a deposit and L had protected it in one of the approved schemes but he had not given the prescribed information as required by the Housing (Tenancy Deposits)(Prescribed Information) Order 2007. T allegedly fell into rent arrears and L sought possession. T counter-claimed on the basis of lack of compliance with the Prescribed Information Order. L admitted non-compliance with the Order but argued that the requirement was largely procedural, that … Read the full post
Johnson v Old, Brighton County Court
We have not yet written about this case even though the first instance decision was reported in Legal Action. As it turns out this has been useful as the original decision, as written up in Legal Action has been set aside on appeal to a circuit judge. While this might appear to be a stunning example of perspicacity it is actually complete luck caused by pressure of work.
In summary the case is one relating to tenancy deposit protection. The definition of a tenancy deposit is given in s212 of the Housing Act 2004 as:
any money intended to be held (by the
… Read the full post
We have previously posted on amendments to the Localism Bill tabled in Commons committee which would have had the effect of rewriting the tenancy deposit protection provisions in the Housing Act 2004.
The changes were designed to reset the position back to that which was set out by the government when it originally put the provisions forward and before the legislation was undermined by a number of Court of Appeal decisions.
The amendments were not supported by the Government in Commons committee and were withdrawn on the basis that an alternative would be put in place. However, there has been no alternative forthcoming thus far and time is getting short.… Read the full post
Gladehurst Properties Ltd v Hashemi  EWCA Civ 604 (Not on BAILII at time of writing)
UPDATE: Transcript now available on BAILII
In Tiensia LJ Sedley said that the decision of the majority ‘eviscerated’ the tenancy deposit protection legislation. The Court of Appeal has now returned to complete the job with a hanging by the neck until almost dead followed by a quartering with the body parts to be distributed throughout the kingdom.
The facts were relatively simple. Mr Hashemi was a tenant, along with a Mr Johnson, of Gladehurst Properties. The tenancy deposit of some £6,240 was never protected by G. Much of that deposit (less a deduction of … Read the full post
Potts v Densley & Anor  EWHC 1144 (QB)
Another case on tenancy deposit protection has hit the High Court, with a rather strange outcome.
P was the tenant of D and another party. The deposit was not protected during the tenancy. This was raised by P towards the end of the tenancy and D apparently offered to return the money to her. She declined and insisted it was protected. The tenancy was then ended by notice from P and she vacated the property. The deposit money was then placed with the DPS but the prescribed information was never served on P. In fact, it seems that DPS had not … Read the full post
A brief note to highlight some unexpected amendments that have been tabled to the Localism Bill. The latest marshalled list includes new sections which are designed to make amendments to the Housing Act 2004 and specifically to the tenancy deposit protection provisions.
The changes dispose of the unclear concept of ‘initial requirements’ and remove the late protection loophole revealed by cases such as Draycott v Hannells and Tiensia v Univeresal Estates. They also remove the loophole utilised by some landlords of returning the deposit to the tenant and then asserting that s214(4) only requires that they pay the three times penalty if they have also been ordered to pay … Read the full post