An order for possession has been set aside by a court on the basis that the Prescribed Information did not contain the landlord’s name and address.
Instead, it showed the agent’s name and address as the holder of the deposit.
The deposit itself was protected by the TDS, which has always advised that either the landlord’s name or that of the agent can be used in the Prescribed Information.
The Prescribed Information itself was served to the tenant within the correct 30-day limit. However, after possession of the property was sought and given, the tenant appealed – and was successful.
The agent concerned is trying to seek legal clarification, and may themselves now appeal.
A spokesperson for the TDS said that its Prescribed Information template had been unchanged and unchallenged since the start, in 2007, and that its format is based on both legal advice and consultation with the government department concerned, CLG.
He said: “This has made it clear that the information to be provided to the tenant on the Prescribed Information form should include who is actually holding the deposit and this is consistent with the tenancy deposit legislation, which says that references to a landlord include any person acting on their behalf in relation to the tenancy.”
He added: “We think this is the first case where this issue has been raised.”
Pending further clarification which we hope to be able to bring you, agents and landlords might meanwhile like to note the above.