x
By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
STAY CONNECTED!
    
newsletter-button

OTHER FEATURES

Security deposit cap – where do landlords and tenants stand?

We’re lucky enough to interact with thousands of landlords and tenants every month. As a result, we get the chance to engage them on the issues that are affecting the private rented sector, whether its rent levels, regulation or fees.

Over the last year, we’ve had plenty of opportunities to ask about their views on the issue of a cap on tenancy deposits. Through these conversations we’ve learned that there’s a clear appetite for such a cap among both groups. 

Tenants and landlords understand the benefits of a cap

Landlords clearly understand the need for tenants to be able to afford to move and can see that having to raise a large deposit (as well as the first month’s rent) can create an unnecessary barrier to tenants’ mobility.

The overwhelming majority of renters also understand that landlords should have the right to protect themselves against damage to their property.

There is clearly consensus on the benefits of deposits, which provide peace of mind for both parties, particularly when accompanied by a free, impartial dispute resolution service for those rare occasions when landlord and tenant do not agree on how the money is returned.

Where should a deposit cap be set?

We’re confident that it is excessive deposits that represent the issue. As a result, a cap set at a reasonable level would be a decent solution. But what is reasonable?

There’s a huge range of types of property on the market, and it’s clear that setting a single figure wouldn’t work. Set it too high and some tenants will be priced out. Set it too low and landlords will no longer be comfortable renting larger or more expensive properties. For these reasons, relating the figure to rent seems sensible.

Looking at our figures, we can see that deposits normally average between a month and six weeks’ rent. A cap of six weeks’ worth would therefore represent a policy that was in line with the thinking of the overwhelming majority of the sector and suit the requirements of most properties. 

The problem with pets

There is one set of circumstances which may create issues for this system: pets. In our experience, landlords are more likely to want to set higher deposit levels where pets are involved, as both the likelihood and potential extent of damage and mess increases significantly.

The risk is that if landlords don’t think that six weeks’ rent is enough to cover themselves, they may simply just refuse tenants with pets.

Nevertheless, by setting a maximum, landlords will retain some flexibility, particularly if they are minded to set a low deposit for a particular tenant or property.

*Julian Foster is managing director of The Deposit Protection Service

  • icon

    Yet another piece of legislation that will back fire. If they cap it at 6 weeks, we won't accept any pets, any guarantors, and only both parties employed. Basically unless they are the perfect tenant they'll be homeless or have little choice. I've sold 10% of our buy to let portfolio this year with more to come, so there will be less houses, less choice, more restrictions, no tenants fees, so only the best tenants will find a home - well done all you advocates of this dumb legislation, when the actual issue is that the UK IS FULL UP!

  • Angus Shield

    I have been a Letting Agent for nearly 21 years. We operate in a very transient area (MOD & medical). We used to operate a ‘1.5 x month rent’ as a deposit value (in the 90's & 00's), but on large properties this became a considerable sum (albeit the tenants were generally high-earners with families & pets). We then adopted ‘6-weeks rent’ which was almost the same, but for the last 6 years have operated 'rent + £200' as a deposit figure as well as the first month’s rent. This works and on the ONE occasion we were exposed to the DPS process, the DPS found in our favour as our supporting evidential documentation/images was sound.
    My point is that the system has worked for us, and all I speak to, for years. Why is it being fettered with?
    Market forces will normally precipitate best methods & quantum rather than pointless quangos!

icon

Please login to comment

valpal
submit