Gladehurst Properties Limited v Farid Hashemi (on behalf of himself and Matthew Johnson) [electronic resource]
Language: English Publication details: 2011Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2011] EWCA Civ 604, 19 May 2011. H and another had been tenants of a flat, on which a deposit was paid to G. The deposit was not placed within a tenancy deposit scheme. At the end of the tenancy, a deduction was made from the deposit before it was returned to H, to account for repairs and unpaid bills. H challenged this and 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. A previous judge had found for the defendents. "Held": appeal allowed. Once a lease has expired, a claim under S214 cannot be made.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | Virtual Online | ONLINE PUBLICATION (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 153579-2001 |
[2011] EWCA Civ 604, 19 May 2011. H and another had been tenants of a flat, on which a deposit was paid to G. The deposit was not placed within a tenancy deposit scheme. At the end of the tenancy, a deduction was made from the deposit before it was returned to H, to account for repairs and unpaid bills. H challenged this and 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. A previous judge had found for the defendents. "Held": appeal allowed. Once a lease has expired, a claim under S214 cannot be made.