My understanding is that if a rented property is sold the deposit can be transferred if it is in a custodial scheme (i.e. DPS) but not if the deposit had been placed in an insurance based scheme. If it was in a custodial scheme I guess the 30 day rule would apply. If a landlord/agent knows the property will be sold at some stage then the custodial scheme seems the best bet.

Does anyone know different?

A Section 21 lasts as long as the tenancy lasts and does not expire after any specific period such as 12 months. I believe the Law Commission’s Rented Homes Bill was going to set a time limit on the life of Section 21s but as far as I am aware it never became law. I did also hear of a case where a judge threw out a Section 21 that was 2 years old but it was overturned at appeal. Any new or replacement tenancy would of course cancel the Section 21.

Does anyone know differently?

I can’t imagine why any landlord would want to start a tenancy without taking the full deposit in cleared funds up-front but I did notice that the recently re-vamped DPS website now accepts multiple payments for a deposit so perhaps it is something landlords and agents do (for whatever reason) but how does this fit in with the laws on tenancy deposits?

Looking at S212 of the Housing Act 2004 for clues…

“tenancy deposit”, in relation to a shorthold tenancy, means any money intended to be held (by the landlord or otherwise) as security for—

(a)the performance of any obligations of the tenant, or

(b)the discharge of any liability of his,

arising under or in connection with the tenancy.

The key part in here for me is ‘any money’ so whether that is the £10 first instalment or the £590 final instalment it is all money held as a deposit so I guess that at each payment the landlord has 30 days to protect that payment – sounds cumbersome.

Do you take desposits on instalments? why?