“The Court of Appeal has recently ruled on a tenancy deposit protection case regarding the issue of prescribed information. Here T had paid a deposit and L had protected it in one of the approved schemes but he had not given the prescribed information as required by the Housing (Tenancy Deposits)(Prescribed Information) Order 2007. T allegedly fell into rent arrears and L sought possession. T counter-claimned on the basis of lack of compliance with the Prescribed Information Order. L admitted non-compliance with the Order but argued that the requirement was largely procedural, thjat the purpose of the legislation was to protect depisits (which had been done) and that T could have found out all he wanted to know from teh scheme administrator. The lower Court dismised T’s claim holding that information in the tenancy agreement coupled with the further information provided by L during the hearing was enough to comply with the requirements of the Order.”
NearlyLegal, 7th November 2012
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
