Karen Julie Potts v Robert Densley and Shirley Elizabeth Pays [electronic resource]
Karen Julie Potts v Robert Densley and Shirley Elizabeth Pays [electronic resource]
- 2011
[2011] EWHC 1144 (QB), 6 May 2011. The claimant (P) had been tenant of the defendents (D). P had paid a deposit to D after requesting termination of the tenancy, D offered to repay the deposit immediately, however P specified that it should be paid into a tenancy deposit scheme. This was done after the termination of the tenancy, and P made a claim for three times the amount of the deposit, under the Housing Act 2004 S214, on the basis that the rules relating to tenancy deposit schemes had not been followed and that necessary information had not been supplied. A previous judge had found that there had been a technical breach, however in view of the unusual circumstances she did not impose sanctions on D. P appealed. "Held": appeal dismissed.
POTTS v DENSLEY AND ANOR
HOUSING ACT 2004 S214
England and Wales--1543-
[2011] EWHC 1144 (QB), 6 May 2011. The claimant (P) had been tenant of the defendents (D). P had paid a deposit to D after requesting termination of the tenancy, D offered to repay the deposit immediately, however P specified that it should be paid into a tenancy deposit scheme. This was done after the termination of the tenancy, and P made a claim for three times the amount of the deposit, under the Housing Act 2004 S214, on the basis that the rules relating to tenancy deposit schemes had not been followed and that necessary information had not been supplied. A previous judge had found that there had been a technical breach, however in view of the unusual circumstances she did not impose sanctions on D. P appealed. "Held": appeal dismissed.
POTTS v DENSLEY AND ANOR
HOUSING ACT 2004 S214
England and Wales--1543-