header-logo header-logo

08 February 2007 / Mark Loveday
Issue: 7259 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

Safe deposits?

Landlords beware—there’s a new regime in town. Mark Loveday reports

Anyone involved in the residential lettings market will be familiar with tenancy deposits. Typically a tenant is required to pay a month’s deposit against failure to pay rent or comply with other tenancy obligations. In central London this may mean tenants coughing up hundreds, if not thousands, of pounds, never to be seen again until their tenancies are over.

The Survey of English Housing recently indicated that 32% of tenants who paid a deposit had it returned only in part or not at all. Of these, 45% believed that the deposit had been withheld unjustly. These disputes don’t seem to have worried litigators much in the past. Woodfall—Landlord & Tenant devotes about seven sentences of its five volumes to the subject of tenancy deposits. However, from 6 April 2007, that may change with the implementation of the Housing Act 2004 (HA 2004), Ch 4. The legislation aims to remove the risk that rogue landlords and agents might misappropriate deposits, and provide a quick and cheap means of resolving disputes.

The basic regime

The legislation applies

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll