Landmark Case Serves To Remind Landlords About The Complexities Of Renting

10 July 2012 Categories: News

Landmark Case Serves To Remind Landlords About The Complexities Of Renting

In a landmark court case this week it was determined that a landlord, who was attempting to recover a service charge from his tenant, had failed to meet the requirements of Section 47 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 by omitting his own residential address from the demand notice. The outcome of this oversight was the tenant’s right not to pay the amount quoted in the demand.

The decision, heralded as a landmark, serves as a reminder to landlords about the complexities of the Landlord and Tenant Act, and in particular the statutory requirement that a landlord’s residential address must be used as the primary point of contact on all written demands to residential tenants. Even if a landlord chooses to place debt management matters in the hands of an official collection agent his address must still be quoted on all written correspondents.

Caroline DeLaney from top London law firm Kingsley Napley commented on the outcome saying, “Landlords and managing agents need to take urgent note of this case or suffer the consequences if their demand notices to tenants are found to be technically defective.

“An astute tenant can defer payment successfully, or at worst may be able to refuse to pay monies at all, if demand notices are not fully compliant with the Landlord & Tenant Act in terms of correct address details.”