Wood v Arkley (2018)

Bradford County Court, 15 March 2018 The landlord (Wood) sought possession under section 21 and the tenant filed a defence and counterclaim stating that the prescribed information had not been served on the ‘relevant person’ as required by section 213 of the Housing Act 2004 and was therefore invalid. The relevant person was the tenant’s father who the tenant claimed had paid the deposit creating an interest in the deposit at the end of the tenancy. The landlord did not file a defence for the counterclaim and the tenant applied for default judgment. The judge