You HAVE to reprotect a deposit when it turns Statutory...?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    You HAVE to reprotect a deposit when it turns Statutory...?

    I am a member of the NLA and have just received my quarterly magazine. There's a section called "Do you know whether...?"

    I will repeat verbatim the question and answer about reprotecting a deposit from an AST that turns periodic...

    "Must I protect a deposit again when an AST reverts to a statutory periodic tenancy?"

    "Yes. A SPT arises where a fixed term ends and no notice has been served, and there is no detail in the AST to set out the nature of the tenancy after the end of the fixed term."

    It then goes on to say the NLA AST covers this by adding in its own special terms so that the deposit doesn't need reprotecting.

    Is this correct?!

    I use their AST so it seems I'm ok. But if in future I don't, this opens a bag of worms, no?

    #2
    I suggest that Section 215B of the Housing Act 2004 say otherwise.
    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga...4/section/215B

    It might have been true before the deregulation act, but no longer.
    I am not sure how a contractual term could change the legal position, either.

    The NLA does seem to have a habit of publishing inaccurate information.
    Their press releases are a constant source of joy, for instance.
    When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
    Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

    Comment


      #3
      The s213 requirements apply again at the start of the SPT per Superstrike Ltd v Rodrigues [2013]. Per s215B, if the deposit continued to be protected in accordance with the same scheme you last provided PI about, then you are deemed to have complied with the requirements.

      Generally speaking, with custodial scheme you don't have to do anything. With insurance scheme, you need to press a button or two on their website telling them the tenancy is continuing as a SPT so that the deposit is continued to be protected.
      I am not a lawyer, nor am I licensed to provide any regulated advice. None of my posts should be treated as legal or financial advice.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
        I am not sure how a contractual term could change the legal position, either.
        I guess they make it a CPT so that SPT doesn't arise.
        I am not a lawyer, nor am I licensed to provide any regulated advice. None of my posts should be treated as legal or financial advice.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by KTC View Post
          I guess they make it a CPT so that SPT doesn't arise.
          Ah, that makes sense.
          When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
          Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

          Comment


            #6
            I knew/thought they were wrong. That's the only time I've seen that.

            Comment


              #7
              They also do not seem to understand that an AST is the tenancy and not the tenancy agreement.

              Comment

              Latest Activity

              Collapse

              Working...
              X