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

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll