Tag Archive for 'tenancy deposit'

Tenancy deposit penalties awarded!

There are two appeals on cases involving claims for the return of deposits and the three times penalty in both of which – astonishingly, given the recent history of High Court and Court of Appeal decisions – the tenant was awarded the penalty. We have said before that it would now be a somewhat incompetent landlord who would be caught by a claim. You can draw your own conclusions from the facts of these cases. The way in which Hashemi is distinguished in the first of these cases is interesting, but perhaps unlikely to be of general application

First, in the High Court:
Suurpere v Nice & Anor [2011] EWHC … Read the full post

Tenancy Deposits Back in the Localism Bill

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The amendments were not supported by the Government in Commons committee and were withdrawn on the basis that an alternative would be put in place.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

Eviscerated? Now also Drawn and Quartered

Gladehurst Properties Ltd v Hashemi [2011] 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

Not So Protected

Potts v Densley & Anor [2011] 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

Tenancy Deposits in the Localism Bill?

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

Mr Pickles is unlawful and other bits

Eric Pickles hearing the judgmentCala Homes (South) Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government & Anor [2010] EWHC 2866 (Admin) found Eric Pickles, SoS at DCLG, acted unlawfully in scrapping the Regional Strategies for housing development, which also, lest we forget, included requirements for local authorities to identify and develop sites for travellers and gypsys. Mr Pickles had announced the decision to scrap the strategies under s79(6) of the Local Democracy Economic Development and Construction Act 2009.

Alas for Mr Pickles, this has turned out to be unlawful because:
a) the decision involved using that power for an improper purpose by “undermining the policy of the LDEDCA 2009 that there should … Read the full post

Asked, but not necessarily answered

After the excitements of Kay v UK, the LSC Judicial Review and the coming into force of (bits) of the Equalities Act – on which we will have a post shortly – there is a bit of a lull before the floods of new housing case law start up again. So, time for another trawl through the logs of search terms that brought people to nearly legal in the last month. Some can be answered, some are unanswerable and some are frankly bewildering…

how to wear a cravat
boldly and flamboyantly, with no sense of shame, or taste. There is no such thing as an ironic or indeed an … Read the full post



row of sheds footer image
4 pages