Superstrike, Strikes again!

Just when we thought it was safe to serve a Section 21, Superstrikes raises its ugly head again, this time in the form of Gardner v McCusker, Birmingham County Court. As we all know the ins and outs of Superstrike Ltd v Rodrigues [2013] I wont bore you all with this, however the bones of this new case simply clarify what we were all wondering. Gardner v McCusker the judge found in favour of the tenant for the following reasons The landlord granted a Fixed Term Tenancy for 6 months, deposit was protected and Prescribed inform was attempted to be given to the tenant. On the Fixed term becoming Periodic, the deposit was seen to be re-received, but was not re-protected and new PI was not issues. Upon receipt of the deposit the obligations under s.213 arose; those obligations included a requirement to serve the prescribed information A section 21 notice was served by the landlord on the tenant. The result of this was that the s.21 notice was invalid and the landlord was liable to pay damages. The court ordered the deposit to be returned to the tenant and damages of 2 times the value of the deposit to be paid (so £1,800 in all). The claimants were to pay the costs of the claim and counterclaim (to be set-off against some rent-arrears and outstanding costs orders from other – earlier – proceedings). Source: http://nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/2014/05/the-tenant-superstrikes-back/