header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Statutory overkill?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
23 July 2015 / Mark Tempest
Issue: 7663 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

Mark Tempest provides a refresher course on the tenancy deposit scheme for some light holiday cramming

The Deregulation Act 2015 introduced new provisions into the tenancy deposit protection regime of the Housing Act 2004 (HA 2004). These have reversed the most serious effects of Superstrike v Rodriques [2013] EWCA Civ 669, [2013] All ER (D) 135 (Jun) and confirmed the decision in Charalambous v Ng [2014] EWCA Civ 1604, [2014] All ER (D) 175 (Dec). 

Landlords need only protect the deposit once

Section 215 of HA 2004 prevents a landlord holding an unprotected deposit from serving a notice made under s 21 of the Housing Act 1988 (HA 1988) on the tenant. Section 214 exposes a landlord holding an unprotected deposit to the risk of a claim from the tenant for the return of the deposit plus a penalty of up to three times the deposit sum.

In Superstrike, a fixed term assured shorthold tenancy (AST) was granted—and a deposit taken—before ss 214 and 215 came into force in 2007. The fixed term expired

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
Read All
Public Accounts Committee warn of ‘extinction’ risk for legal aid
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
NLJ this week: The insider returns
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
NLJ this week: Drawing the line on contempt
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
NLJ this week: Stop and search by the numbers
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
NLJ this week: Looking back on the prorogation that never was
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll