East East Midlands London North East North West Northern Ireland Scotland South East South West Wales West Midlands Yorkshire & the Humber

Superstrike: Sector-wide guidance now available as campaign survey is launched

Written by RLA

Over the past few weeks there has been a lot of speculation about the so-called ‘Superstrike’ case and the impact on landlords and deposits…

Over the past few weeks there has been a lot of speculation about the so-called ‘Superstrike’ case and the impact on landlords and deposits.

The RLA has avoided a knee-jerk reaction, and has been working with all the other key stakeholders across the private rented sector (including deposit protection companies and landlord associations) to develop one set of guidelines for the industry, so that landlords can obtain consistent advice.

The Superstrike case was very complex and the RLA and its sector partners have worked hard to simplify the implications with a clear set of guidelines.

These guidelines are now available below and provide guidance for landlords affected by the Superstrike ruling. The RLA urges you to read them, download them, and keep them for future reference.

We hope you find the guidelines useful and if you have any doubts please do not hesitate to contact the RLA helpline on 0845 666 5000.

Help the RLA and its partners campaign against the Superstrike ruling: Complete our survey

In agreement with the Government and other landlord and agent organisations, we are conducting a survey to establish the extent of the problems possibly faced by landlords.

Landlords are affected by the Superstrike decision where they still hold a deposit.   Those affected are:

  • Landlords who took a deposit before April 2007 and who did not protect it.  This was in line with Government advice at the time.  However, as a result of Superstrike, where a fixed term tenancy ended after April 2007 then, if a statutory periodic tenancy started because the tenant stayed on, there could be implications for the landlord.
  • For all deposits taken after April 2007, even where they have been protected, if a statutory periodic tenancy subsequently started at any time then the landlord could be affected.

Possibly there are other situations where the landlord could be affected as a result of the Superstrike case but this survey is to obtain information about those landlords who are still holding deposits in the two situations set out above.

Read the Superstrike guidelines now

Further to this document, the RLA has provided a more detailed document for its members explaining all the terms used in the above guidelines.

Complete our Superstrike survey now

Please take a few minutes to complete our survey.

About the author



The Residential Landlords Association (RLA) represents the interests of landlords in the private rented sector (PRS) across England and Wales. With over 23,000 subscribing members, and an additional 16,000 registered guests who engage regularly with the association, we are the leading voice of private landlords. Combined, they manage almost half a million properties.


  • There is no facility to insure a statutory periodic tenancy as MYDEPOSIT’s require to know the length of the fixed period, therefore the Judge has made a mistake.

    The tenant is insured for the life of the tenancy and can go to tribunal at any time either during the fixed tenancy (if he surrenders the tenancy) or after the fixed term has ended. His or her rights are not compromised. Now the RLA are suggestion we should not serve section 21’s. as they convert the continual contractual tenancy into a statutory periodic tenancy. What a load of cobblers. A Judge made a mistake and needs to be appealed against or rebuked. I don’t mind which! Decay

    • The RLA has outlined a number of options.

      Unfortunately this judgement is not clear cut in its implications and the defendent has not sought to appeal. Therefore, the RLA is working with other sector organisations to persuade the Government to step in and resolve this matter.

  • I agree with Decay, I had a Judge say that a shorthold tenancy could not be less than 6 months a year or two ago, and I had to get the senior partner at my solicitors to write to the Judge to tell him he was wrong!! He then admitted his mistake.

  • Sadly this judgement misses an important point in my view and that is the landlord does not have an opportunity after the statutory tenancy (usually 6 months) has finished to inspect the property for damage.

    It could happen that at the time the periodic tenancy starts the deposit could have be wiped out to cover the cost of damage.

    If this were the case then there would be no deposit to protect.

    Oh dear, the Judge has made a rod for his back here!

  • If periodic tenancies, which are for no fixed period, are considered new leases, with the requirement to protect the deposits again, how often would we be expected to do so? Or will it just be the once at the end of the original lease?

    • Helen I think you make an important legal point. If the periodic is a new lease then it is a new lease every month. Meaning that the deposit should be re-protected every month.
      Plainly wrong and silly. A periodic should be and is a continuation of the terms of the original tenancy however with no legal fixed term.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.