Bali v Manaquel Company Limited, County Court at Central London, 15th April 2016

Manaquel gaveBali an assured shorthold tenancy. Bali paid a deposit which was protected in the Deposit Protection Service (DPS) scheme. Manaquel later served a section 21 notice on Baliand started possession proceedings. Bali claimed that the Manaquelhad not complied with the initial deposit protection requirements and in the first intance the judgeheld that the landlord had complied and possession was granted.

Bali appealed and on appeal the same point was raised. It was arguedthat the notice was invalid because the landlord had not provided the tenant with the Deposit Protection Service leafletas required by the legilsation. The landlord had included a printout of the Deposit Protection Service’s (The DPS) terms and conditions but not a leaflet.

The Judge held