header-logo header-logo

Whose deposit is it anyway?

11 March 2010 / Tamsin Cox
Issue: 7408 / Categories: Features , Landlord&tenant , Property
printer mail-detail

Tamsin Cox weighs up the successes & failures of the tenancy deposit scheme three years on

The Tenancy Deposit Schemes (TDS) described in ss 213–215 and Sch 10 of the Housing Act 2004 (HA 2004) have now been in force for nearly three years, and those who deal regularly with the Assured Shorthold Tenancies to which they relate will now be familiar with the basic requirements and somewhat draconian sanctions imposed on landlords who fail properly to comply with them. However, since the first imposition of the TDS a number of issues have arisen in practice in relation to the interpretation of the provisions of the statute, but there is a dearth of reported authority to assist practitioners. In the last month, however, the first High Court decision on the proper interpretation of the TDS has been published.

The first authority to be made widely available in relation to the TDS was Harvey v Bamforth (2008) 46 EG 119, a decision of His Honour Judge Bullimore in the Sheffield County Court. However,

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll