here) quoting a report from the My Deposits tenancy deposit scheme, which apparently says (I have not been able to find the original report) that tenants are losing out, as 12% of claims are lost by tenants not properly following the terms of their tenancy agreement.
Excuse me, but doesn’t that also mean that 88% of landlords are losing their cases?
Meaning that under this scheme (primarily used by landlords rather than agents), more landlords are found wanting than tenants. Does that not perhaps also indicate that the TDPS was, perhaps, a good thing after all? (Contrary to the squawks of the landlords associations before the schemes were set up, including the NLA which now runs the My Deposits scheme).
Looking around at the schemes web-sites for more news, I see that the Dispute Services scheme web-site states that they are finding that only 2% of cases need adjudication, a lower than anticipated figure. As we do not know the percentage of My Deposits cases which go to arbitration, it is difficult to make much comment. However one could speculate that if there are more disputes in the My Deposits scheme (which is aimed at landlords) than in the Dispute Services scheme (which is aimed at agents), then that would indicate that agents tend on the whole to deal with deposits in a more responsible way than landlords. Needless to say, agents have been saying this for years.
There is also of course the shocking statistic put forward by the DPS of 62% of landlords not protecting the deposit at all (discussed in my post here).
Even though 88% (i.e. most of) of disputes with landlords are won by tenants, I suspect that it is still mostly only the good landlords who have protected their deposits, and that the worst landlords are still getting away with it.
I have seen several news items on the internet recently (eg
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Cool Followers
Popular entries
-
The Securities and Exchange Commission has voted unanimously to introduce amendments designed to strengthen the regulatory framework govern...
-
Figures from the DCA show that landlord possession claims were 20% down during the last quarter. Co-incidentally this was the first quarter...
-
The Information and Privacy Commissioner of Alberta released a very interesting order today, considering whether the right to freedom of exp...
-
Earlier this year, in Hawkes v Cuddy [2009] EWCA Civ 261 , the Court of Appeal declined to follow the position, adopted in Re Guidezone [2...
-
Note - the Landlord Law Blog has now moved to www.landlordlawblog.co.uk . There is still quite a bit of confusion regarding the recent deci...
-
Like many people I suspect, I was concerned to read the recent BBC report about glass ceilings which, the report said, means that "to...
-
In Gregson v HAE Trustees Ltd & Ors [2008] EWHC 1006 (Ch) a so-called "dog-leg" claim was brought against the directors of a ...
-
Public limited companies in Norway were given until the start of this year to implement rules designed to increase the representation of wom...
-
Today, April 6, is an important date for aficionados of the Companies Act 2006 and anyone else interested in the Government's programme...
-
The Ontario Information and Privacy Commissioner is investigating after old medical records were found in a dumpster behind a coffee shop by...
Comments
Post a comment on: Tenancy Deposit Protection Schemes - news and views