Issued a section 21 but have a Prescribed Information problem?

Reply to the comment left by Landlord Solicitor @ RSPLegal at 07/02/2024 – 10:24
Under Deregulation Act 2015, the tenancy deposit breach only occurs once, so even if you renew or lapse into a periodic tenancy, only a single claim can now be made by the tenant against the landlord.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/20/notes/division/5/33

Reply to the comment left by Jonathan Willis at 08/02/2024 – 12:56
Actually, case law suggests that the courts disagree with that interpretation.

Reply to the comment left by Jonathan Willis at 08/02/2024 – 12:56
Sorry to disagree but the effect of the Deregulation Act 2015 was to ensure that where a deposit had been registered and prescribed information provided under the first tenancy then the subsequent occurrence of a periodic tenancy did not trigger those obligations again, where the requirements have not been complied with under the first tenancy then there is the potential for the liability to be triggered again on the creation of a new (albeit periodic) tenancy – There are multiple conflicting County Court decisions but no determinative authority

Reply to the comment left by Landlord Solicitor @ RSPLegal at 08/02/2024 – 17:06
….so if anything went to court it would be up to that judge on the day to decide if it should be applied or not across the subsequent periodic tenancy.

Given that there is no clear answer/case law, then the judges ruling could be openly challenged itself I presume as a result?

So to get round all this – how do you pay back a tenants deposit if it is held in a scheme if the tenant does not engage to be able for it to be released back to them?

Is that taken into account? At what point is the deposit deemed ‘returned’. Could it be at the point action is actively taken by the LL to trigger the deposit holding company to progress this. At this point the process is out of the LL hands so effectively he cannot be said to be holding anything at all? The money is never held by the LL , so it actually the action of who ‘holds’ the deposit on behalf of the tenant at this point that is key to determining this?

Reply to the comment left by Reluctant Landlord at 09/02/2024 – 11:41
It could go either way in Court but deposit claims are cost bearing regardless of the small claims limit so it would be extremely economically risky to run one to assessment unless you had an actual defence rather than just arguing about the appropriate level to pay, the costs of appealing a county court decision would be even more severe which is probably why there are no higher level authorities, you would ideally settle a deposit claim quickly pre issue where costs are not payable and take a pragmatic/ commercial view. Handled badly deposit claims can cost a lot more than they should.

An indirect effect of the RRA when implemented will mean that new tenancies start periodic so there will be no second tenancy occurrence to trigger a second liability.

Methods of repaying a deposit including refunds via DPS, cheques etc are also arguable either way with mixed caselaw Your only sure fire method is bank transfer.

Reply to the comment left by Landlord Solicitor @ RSPLegal.com at 09/02/2024 – 12:02
…but you ned the tenant banking details for this and if they are savvy they wont agree so you can pay it back….

For Prescribed Information, do you not have to get it signed before its recognised as accepted?

Reply to the comment left by Reluctant Landlord at 09/02/2024 – 14:10
Yes this is true, but the courts are savvy too. If you can demonstrate an honest mistake and efforts to repay it then the court uses it’s discretion. If you are owed rent perhaps you could claim equitable offset? Best way is to follow the rule to the letter, if not mitigate it with an offer. Part 36 is there to protect you from costs as well.

Reply to the comment left by Steve Daniels at 10/02/2024 – 09:25
That’s one way, but that’s evidence not law. The best way is to contract out of the law of property act 1926 with a contractual method of service. So any post tenancy document is deemed served two days after posting first class. Obviously this doesn’t work for the first gsc

Reply to the comment left by Steve Daniels at 10/02/2024 – 09:25
You cant force a tenant to sign the PI, but they must be offered the opportunity to do so. You, however, must sign it to be valid. I wouldnt personally hand over the keys until theyve signed everything, but if you didnt do that, you could use witnesses or a process server. Even if you posted a couple of copies with a request to sign and return one a court might accept this if you had some evidence. It only has to satisfy ‘balance of probabilities’, not ‘beyond reasonable doubt’.