NLA And UKALA Call For Clarity Over
Tenancy Deposit Protection Law
NLA / UKALA press release:
The National Landlords Association (NLA) and the UK Association of Letting Agents (UKALA) are jointly calling for clarity amid speculation about the impact of the recent Court of Appeal judgement in the case between Superstrike Ltd and Marino Rodrigues.
The judgement of 14 June 2013 is the latest in a long line of appeal cases to cast doubt on landlords’ responsibility to protect tenants’ deposits.
In the case of Superstrike Ltd and Marino Rodrigues, the Lord Justice Lloyd’s conclusion has raised significant questions about the status of long-term periodic tenancies which began prior to the introduction of tenancy deposit protection (TDP).
Richard Lambert, CEO of the NLA, said: “It is understandable that landlords are concerned about this case, and the potential impact it could have on those who find that they have unintentionally failed to comply with tenancy deposit protection legislation as a result of Lord Justice Lloyd’s ruling. However, they must remember that this judgement only applies to a very specific set of circumstances, meaning that most landlords will be unaffected. Although it is likely to affect relatively few tenancies, the NLA’s real concern in this matter is that, once again, professional landlords, following government guidance on how to comply with the law, have been caught out by the unintended consequences of the Housing Act 2004. The Government must act swiftly to reassure the industry that law-abiding landlords will not face sanctions as a result of this new interpretation of the rules. We’ve written to the Housing Minister calling on him to take urgent action to re-assert the spirit of the law on tenancy deposit protection and restore fairness to the system which was designed to ensure it.”
Caroline Kenny, UKALA Chief Executive, said: “UKALA is troubled that once again tenancy deposit protection rules appear to have been thrown into disarray by the Court of Appeal. Landlords and their agents simply trying to understand and comply with the law will be rightly disillusioned by yet another reconsideration of ‘the right way to protect a deposit’. We hope to see this matter taken to the Supreme Court so that clarity can be achieved once and for all. In the meantime, the industry is in desperate need of guidance from the Government about how to treat affected deposits.”
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
- Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
- Click to print (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)