Tenant Wins Return of Holding Deposit Under Tenant Fees Act 2019
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal ruled that a tenant is entitled to the return of a £250 holding deposit under the Tenant Fees Act 2019 because the landlord failed to enter into a tenancy agreement within the specified timeframe and did not provide valid reasons for withholding the deposit.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to the return of a holding deposit if a tenancy agreement is not entered into within the specified timeframe.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal ordered the return of a holding deposit under the Tenant Fees Act 2019.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal ordered the return of a £250 holding deposit to the tenant under the Tenant Fees Act 2019, as the landlord failed to enter into a tenancy agreement within the specified timeframe and did not provide valid reasons for withholding the deposit.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AE/HTC/2023/0001 HMCTS code (paper, video, audio)
P: PAPERREMOTE Property : 19 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : N/A Respondent : [redacted] : N/A Type of [NAME] : For recovery of all or part of a prohibited payment or holding deposit: Tenant Fees Act 2019 Tribunal member : Judge Tagliavini Venue : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of decision : 27 July 2023
DECISION
2 The tribunal’s summary decision (1) The tribunal finds the £250 paid by the applicant to the respondent as a holding deposit in respect of [NAME] situate at 19 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] is a recoverable payment pursuant to Schedule 2 and section 15(2)(3) and (5) of the Tenant Fees Act 2019 and must be returned to the applicant within 7 days of this decision being sent to the parties. (2) The tribunal orders the respondent to reimburse the applicant with the [NAME] fee and hearing fee (if any) within 7 days of this decision being sent to the parties. _________________________________________________ Background 1. This is an [NAME] for an order for the recovery of part of a holding deposit paid in respect of a prospective tenancy of 19 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE], pursuant to section 15 of the Tenant Fees Act 2019. In addition, the applicant seeks to recover any costs incurred in [NAME] the [NAME] to the tribunal. The applicant has also requested the tribunal make an order for interest to be paid but that is not a matter within the jurisdiction of the tribunal.
2. The tribunal gave Directions dated 9 June 2023 requiring the respondent to provide any objection and reasons. The respondent has failed to comply with this direction and therefore the [NAME] is determined on the basis of the applicant’s documents only. The applicant’s case 3. In the [NAME] form, the applicant stated that the respondent is the Landlord of 19 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] (‘[NAME]’). On 9 October 2022, the applicant viewed [NAME] as a prospective tenant. On 11 October 2022, the applicant paid a holding deposit of £250 to the respondent. However, a few days later the respondent told the applicant that [NAME] was no longer available and stated there was an alternative property available that the applicant could view. However, details of this alternative property were not provided to the applicant and no tenancy was entered into by the parties in respect of the subject Property or any alternative property. Subsequently, the applicant requested the return of the holding deposit of £250 but this but refused by the respondent.
4. The applicant asserts that as the parties failed to enter into a tenancy agreement within fifteen days of the respondent receiving the holding
3 deposit, the Respondent was required to repay the holding deposit to me under paragraph 3(c) Schedule 2 of the Tenant Fees Act 2019 and was required to do so by 2 November 2022 under paragraph 4(c) of Schedule 2 of the Tenant Fees Act 2019, or provide me with her written reasons by the same date under paragraph 5(1) of Schedule 2. However, the respondent failed to provide the applicant with her written reasons by that date and has failed to repay the holding deposit. Even had she provided the reasons within the time frame required under Schedule 2, the reasons that the Respondent has given for failing to repay the deposit are not sufficient to meet the exceptions in Schedule 2 of the Act. The tribunal’s decision 4. The tribunal finds the payment of the holding deposit of £250 is a recoverable payment pursuant to ss.15(2) (3)) and (5) of the Tenant Fees Act 2019 and must be returned to the applicant by the respondent. The tribunal’s reasons
5. Paragraph 3 of Schedule 2 of the Tenant Fees Act 2019 states:
3Subject as follows, the person who received the holding deposit must repay it if— (a)the landlord and the tenant enter into a tenancy agreement relating to the housing, (b)the landlord decides before the deadline for agreement not to enter into a tenancy agreement relating to the housing, or (c)the landlord and the tenant fail to enter into a tenancy agreement relating to the housing before the deadline for agreement. 4If paragraph 3 applies, the deposit must be repaid within the period of 7 days beginning with— (a)where paragraph 3(a) applies, the date of the tenancy agreement, (b)where paragraph 3(b) applies, the date on which the landlord decides not to enter into the tenancy agreement, or (c)where paragraph 3(c ) applies, the deadline for agreement.
4 5(1)The person who received the holding deposit must repay it if— (a)[NAME] believes that any of paragraphs 8 to 12 applies in relation to the deposit, but (b)[NAME] does not give the person who paid the deposit a notice in writing within the relevant period explaining why the person who received it intends not to repay it. (2)In sub-paragraph (1) “the relevant period” means— (a)where the landlord decides not to enter into a tenancy agreement before the deadline for agreement, the period of 7 days beginning with the date on which the landlord decides not to do so; (b)where the landlord and tenant fail to enter into a tenancy agreement before the deadline for agreement, the period of 7 days beginning with the deadline for agreement.
6. The tribunal finds the applicant paid the respondent a holding fee of £20 as evidenced by the proof of payment provided. The tribunal also finds the respondent has failed to comply with the provisions of Schedule 2 of the Tenant Fees Act 2019 and has failed to either enter into a tenancy agreement with the applicant in respect of the subject Property and has failed to provide written reasons as to why they do not intend to repay it.
7. Therefore, the tribunal finds the respondent is in breach of the Tenant Fees Act 2019 and is required to return to the applicant the holding deposit paid of £250 within 7 days of this decision being sent to the parties.
8. The tribunal also orders the respondent to reimburse the applicant with the [NAME] fee of £100 and any hearing fee paid within 7 days of the date of this decision being sent to the parties.
Name: Judge Tagliavini
Date: 27 July 20123.
5
Rights of appeal
By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013, the tribunal is required to notify the parties about any right of appeal they may have. If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), then a written [NAME] for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the [NAME] which has been dealing with the case. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must arrive at the [NAME] within 28 days after the tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the [NAME]. If the [NAME] is not made within the 28-day time limit, such [NAME] must include a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28-day time limit; the tribunal will then look at such reason(s) and decide whether to allow the [NAME] for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the tribunal to which it relates (i.e. give the date, [NAME] and the case number), state the grounds of appeal and state the result the party [NAME] the [NAME] is seeking. If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further [NAME] for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Ordered to Repay Holding Deposit Exceeding One Week's Rent
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Handling Fee Ruled as Prohibited Payment Under Tenant Fees Act 2019
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Repayment of Holding Deposit Under Tenant Fees Act 2019
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Orders Landlord to Return Excess Holding Deposit
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Successfully Recovers Prohibited Payment Under Tenant Fees Act 2019
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Holding Deposit Return Due to Technical Issues
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Return of Holding Deposit Under Tenant Fees Act 2019
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Entitled to Holding Deposit Return Under Tenant Fees Act 2019
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Repairs to Prevent Damage
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Entitled to Holding Deposit Return Under Tenant Fees Act 2019
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Permission for Urgent Roof Repairs Without Tenant Consulta…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Repayment of Prohibited Agency Fee Under Tenant Fees Act 2019
A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The tenant was entitled to the return of the holding deposit because a tenancy agreement was not entered into within the specified timeframe.
- The landlord failed to provide written reasons for not repaying the holding deposit.
- The landlord failed to comply with the tribunal's directions to provide an objection and reasons.
- The tribunal found the £250 paid by the applicant was a recoverable payment.
- The tribunal ordered the landlord to reimburse the tenant for the application fee and any hearing fee.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The decision ordered the return of a £250 holding deposit to the tenant.
Who was involved?
The tenant and the landlord were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the landlord must return the holding deposit because they failed to enter into a tenancy agreement within the specified timeframe and did not provide valid reasons for withholding the deposit.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Tenant Fees Act 2019 was applied, specifically sections 15(2)(3)(5) and Schedule 2.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the landlord failed to enter into a tenancy agreement within the specified timeframe and did not provide valid reasons for withholding the deposit.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure that their landlord provides valid reasons for withholding a holding deposit if a tenancy agreement is not reached within the specified timeframe.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The proof of payment of the holding deposit and the failure to enter into a tenancy agreement within the specified timeframe were important pieces of evidence.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving property law.
