A decision in the Court of Appeal (Superstrike vs Rodrigues) earlier this week has caused consternation in the private rented sector, and affects some tenancy deposits. The RLA has taken its time to consider the fall-out from the decision, and has taken expert advice from tenancy deposit providers.
What did the Court of Appeal decide?
The decision goes against Government advice, and the RLA is hopeful that further consideration of the situation will see it rectified in due course.
The Court of Appeal decided:
- That a statutory periodic tenancy constituted a new tenancy.
- A deposit paid before 6th April 2007, where a periodic tenancy (without any changes from the original fixed term) arose after the 6th April 2007 SHOULD have been protected with a tenancy deposit scheme.
- That Prescribed Information should have been served.
In the case of Superstrike vs Rodrigues, the landlord did not protect the deposit or serve Prescribed Information, and therefore could not rely on a section 21 notice to gain possession of the property.
What is the RLA’s response?
In order that we can give you a measured, clear and consistent response, we have been involved in active discussions with our tenancy deposit providers TDS, who in turn are consulting with the Department for Communities and Local Government, along with the other three approved deposit schemes.
The RLA is working closely with TDS, and we will be providing an update via the news hub when more information is available.
- For further information on tenancy deposit schemes, please visit the RLA Guide to Tenancy Deposits.