By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.


Renters could transfer deposit from one landlord to the next under new proposal

Tenants could be permitted to transfer rental deposits directly between landlords instead of having to pay up for their next property while waiting for a refund on the last under new plans being proposed by the government.

Ministers are considering the scheme, known as deposit “passporting”, after James Brokenshire, the housing secretary, put forward the proposal yesterday at the Chartered Institute of Housing conference in Manchester.

The planned scheme is designed to ease the pressure on millions of renters who typically need up to five weeks rent to fund a deposit for a new rental home while having money tied up with an existing landlord.


According to the Deposit Protection Service, the average rental deposit is £1,040 in England and Wales, while tenants in London face paying around £1,750 when moving property.

Passporting would allow a direct transfer of funds from the previous landlord to the new one on the day of the move.


The previous landlord would still be able to claim part of the deposit for any damages, and the tenant could top up the deposit if necessary.

But while the deposit passporting has potential, it should not be made compulsory, according to the National Landlords Association (NLA).

The organisation quite rightly points out that care will need to be taken with any form of passporting to ensure the previous landlord can cover any costs for damages.

NLA research reveals that 33% of landlords had to withhold at least part of a deposit in the last 12 months to cover unpaid rent or damage to their properties.

Chris Norris, director of policy and practice at the NLA, said: “The idea of deposit passporting has been around for a while now, so it comes as no surprise that the Government is considering it. Mr Brokenshire acknowledges that if this is to be implemented it must be done “thoughtfully”, but we must make sure that adequate thought is given to the needs of both tenants and landlords. 

“Everyone agrees that moving between tenancies should be made easier and cheaper, but we also need to recognise why landlords take deposits. A deposit protects against damage or default, so landlords must be confidence their costs are covered before releasing the tenants’ money.”

Want to comment on this story? If so...if any post is considered to victimise, harass, degrade or intimidate an individual or group of individuals on any basis, then the post may be deleted and the individual immediately banned from posting in future.

  • icon

    This bloke is clueless. Tenant leave a mess and part of the deposit gets paid out leaving a shortfall for the next deposit. Money up front in cleared funds is non negotiable. Hollow promises are not of any use whatsoever. Sounds a bit like the minister in charge of EPC roll out - he was clueless as well. No change here then!


    You really couldn't make it up could you Paul?


    Not surprised. This guy can't even count up to 4, claiming he had only two ovens when pictured in front of the four ovens in his kitchen. He must have taken pr advice from Ed Miliband. He'll be eating bacon rolls next!

  • icon
    • 29 June 2019 14:04 PM

    These idiots have simply no understanding as to the business risks of being a LL and I doubt they care one jot.
    The maximum deposit any LL should have taken was 2 month's rent.
    Anymore than that created a premium tenancy.
    No sane LL would want that to occur.

    Even with 2 month's rent as deposit was totally inadequate with rent defaulting tenants.
    So now LL are supposed to cope with just 5 weeks rent to cover damages and rent default etc!!
    While the eviction process remains dysfunctional as it does the deposit now allowed is simply totally inadequate even more so if pets are to be involved.
    It is the dysfunctional eviction process which lies as the root cause of most of the issues in the PRS.
    It simply should not be allowed that a rent defaulting tenant may maintain occupation of a rental property until evicted.
    It is rent defaulting tenants that cause the most problems in the PRS.
    A speedy eviction process in rent defaulting cases only would transform the PRS for the better.
    Govt by its inaction effectively sanctions mass theft from LL by the rent defaulting tenants.
    Making eviction even more difficult will simply result in even more LL selling up.

  • icon

    Deposits were to protect the property and no other reason but not anymore its been turned upside down / back the front, just to protect the Deposit it self , nothing protecting the property and is now another liability for the LL, have a look in your boots see if there is any brains down there


    It just goes to show that these ministers have no idea what the landlord has to put up with.
    It is astounding how they manage to keep coming up with new ideas on how to drive landlords out of the PRS.
    I will be looking for tenants that want to stay as long as possible in future, so that I don't have to go through all this rigmarole too regularly.


Please login to comment

MovePal MovePal MovePal
sign up