Potts v Densley & Anor

Potts v Densley & Anor

The appeal is dismissed because, following Tiensia, the Respondents' late compliance with deposit protection requirements before the hearing provided a complete defence to the section 214(4) claim, and the issue of prescribed information was not properly pleaded or raised at trial and cannot be considered on appeal.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Karen Julie Potts; Respondent/defendant: Robert Densley; Respondent/defendant: Shirley Elizabeth Pays
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From County Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Tenancy Deposit Schemes, Statutory Interpretation, Sanctions for Non Compliance, Procedural Fairness
Landlord and Tenant Law Civil Procedure Tenancy Deposit Schemes Statutory Interpretation Sanctions for Non Compliance Procedural Fairness

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Karen Julie Potts

Appellant/claimant

Robert Densley

Respondent/defendant

Shirley Elizabeth Pays

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From County Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the landlord's late compliance with tenancy deposit protection requirements after the end of the tenancy precludes sanction under section 214(4) of the Housing Act 2004
  2. 2 Whether the failure to provide prescribed information under section 213(5) of the Housing Act 2004 was properly pleaded and should have resulted in sanction
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge had discretion to refuse the mandatory penalty under section 214(4)

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because, following Tiensia, the Respondents' late compliance with deposit protection requirements before the hearing provided a complete defence to the section 214(4) claim, and the issue of prescribed information was not properly pleaded or raised at trial and cannot be considered on appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No order as to costs
  • Deposit to be released to the Appellant as previously ordered by consent