A landlord who tried to charge a prospective tenant for having overnight guests has been ordered to repay the holding deposit.

Noah Hardwicke told a First Tier Property Tribunal that during negotiations for the room, landlord Henryka Senet-Larson failed to disclose a clause requiring a payment for any guests who stayed in the property, and despite requests, his £800 deposit had not been returned.

He viewed the room in Heathfield Road, Acton in London (main image) on 10th November 2023 and paid a deposit two days later. However, he found an undisclosed clause in the contract which stated: ‘A guest is welcome and is charged £30 per night.’

Refused

The landlord refused to change the clause, so Hardwicke decided not to proceed with the tenancy two days later and asked for a reasonable refund.

Senet-Larson suggested the refund depended on finding a new tenant and proposed keeping £500 for December’s vacancy, requesting his bank details for the remaining £300. When he challenged this, she classified the deposit as “business diverging” due to not signing the contract and said it was a business loss for December.

He then demanded a full refund but said the landlord’s response included false claims about previously disclosing the guest charge and showing the contract during viewing.

No contract

Senet-Larson told the court there had never been a lodger-landlord relationship as no rental contract was signed.

She had to cancel three other viewings scheduled for the next couple of days and told him that booking fees would be reduced by £100 if she found a lodger from 1st December but failed to do so until 1st January. She added: “I have lost 1.5 month of rent @ £1,350 per month because of Mr Hardwicke’s change of mind.”

The tribunal ruled that because they failed to enter into an agreement by 26th November, the holding deposit was a prohibited payment under the Tenant Fees Act and was repayable in full.