Claimant won £7,200 awarded County Court · 4 March 2024

Landlord ordered to pay 3x deposit penalty after years of non-protection

A County Court ordered a landlord to pay the maximum three-times penalty for failing to protect a £1,200 deposit for two consecutive tenancies — a total award of £7,200.

1 min read · Last updated 17 May 2026

Case details

Key facts

  • The deposit was never placed into any of the three authorised schemes
  • No prescribed information was ever served
  • Two separate AST agreements were created without any change in the deposit status
  • The landlord was a portfolio landlord with four rental properties
  • The tenants had repeatedly asked for scheme details and been ignored

Timeline

  1. First tenancy starts

    The tenants moved into a two-bed flat. A deposit of £1,200 was paid in cash and a paper receipt issued. No deposit scheme was used.

  2. Second tenancy signed

    The fixed term ended and a new 12-month AST was signed. The same deposit was rolled over. Still no protection.

  3. Section 21 served

    The landlord served a Section 21 notice. The tenants challenged it on the basis the deposit was unprotected.

  4. Tenants vacate

    To avoid court fees and stress, the tenants moved out and rented elsewhere. The deposit was not returned.

  5. Letter before claim

    The tenants sent a letter before claim citing sections 213 and 214 of the Housing Act 2004 and seeking the deposit plus the statutory penalty.

  6. Judgment

    The District Judge awarded the deposit back plus three times the deposit as the penalty for two separate breaches.

The outcome

Under section 214 Housing Act 2004 the court has discretion to award a penalty of between one and three times the deposit when it has not been protected within 30 days, and the deposit itself must be repaid.

The judge held that each AST was a separate breach, in line with established Court of Appeal authority (Superstrike v Rodrigues 2013). That meant the maximum penalty applied to each tenancy.

Aggravating factors that justified pitching each penalty at the full 3x:

  • The landlord was a professional/portfolio landlord, not an accidental one
  • The breach continued over multiple years
  • The tenants had asked for protection details and been ignored
  • The landlord made no effort to remediate even after the letter before claim

Award: deposit of £1,200 returned + 2 × (3 × £1,200) penalty = £7,200 + £1,200 = £8,400 total, of which the £7,200 represented the statutory penalty.

Lessons & takeaways

  • Each separate tenancy can carry its own penalty for the same unprotected deposit.
  • Portfolio landlords are unlikely to get the lower end of the 1x–3x range — courts treat them as having known better.
  • A landlord cannot serve a valid Section 21 notice while the deposit is unprotected.
  • Cash deposits without scheme protection are particularly risky for landlords because there is no paper trail to support good faith.

Why the 3x award is rare

Most penalty awards land between 1x and 2x the deposit. Courts reserve the top of the range for cases with a clear "professional" element — landlords who manage multiple properties, ignore tenant complaints, or have a pattern of similar breaches.

Three features moved this case to the top of the range:

  1. Repeated breaches — two separate ASTs, neither protected
  2. A portfolio landlord — the court inferred knowledge of the legal requirements
  3. No remediation — the landlord didn't protect the deposit even after the letter before claim arrived

If any one of those had been absent the award might have been closer to 1.5x or 2x.

What tenants should do practically

If you suspect your deposit is unprotected:

  1. Check all three schemes online (DPS, MyDeposits, TDS) — each has a free lookup
  2. Ask the landlord in writing for the scheme reference number and prescribed information
  3. If no response, send a letter before claim citing section 214 Housing Act 2004
  4. The claim is a money claim and can be filed using the online MCOL service

The penalty does not require you to still be living at the property — and the limitation period is six years.

LB LegalBriefs

Real legal cases, explained in plain English.

Important

Educational content only. This is not legal advice and we are not a law firm. Speak to a solicitor or qualified adviser for guidance on your situation.

© 2026 LegalBriefs. All case summaries derived from publicly available decisions.