UK Landlord Forum / Life

Has any Judge let Tenants on a Section 8 countersue by deciding money in advance is a DEPOSIT, that should have been protected. Even after Johnson vs Old. He appears satisfied the contract says money isn't a deposit for any damages etc but possibly still wants to set a 'president' that any money taken above one month's rent is LEGALLY A DEPOSIT

context, history and circumstances
specific example or general comment or what the extra money in advance is for or entails or what it covers.

REPLY:It is a specific example (occurrence), from our County Court 'section 8 eviction' hearing. We are the landlord.
As part of a Shorthold Tenancy, One months Rent for the FIRST MONTH of living in our property was taken IN ADVANCE and  One months Rent for the LAST MONTH was taken.
Whilst the judge acknowledged that the contract states clearly it is not a deposit and is not security against any damage, he looked at one of his books and decided 'any' money in advance might be a DEPOSIT
(and therefore need secured via the Deposit Scheme/allow a tenants counterclaim into the many thousands).
Flying in the face of the Johnson vs Old case on the matter.
May we ask please, IS HE CORRECT?

By enlargement, we suppose that if he makes this 'Legal President' then...
if a tenant pays 6 months or a years rent on entering tenancy, all but the first month, may become a deposit?

UPDATE:

The tenants are almost 20k in arrears now,
accelerated it, by not having paid anything in the 4 months of the court process

In the 21st SEPT Hearing the Judge gave them 3 weeks ending 19th OCTOBER
The court replied via email today:
To date, no Defence or Counterclaim has been filed in this matter.

Can we presume the tenants time is up and we should email the Court
ASKING FOR A JUDGEMENT IN DEFAULT?

See also https://forums.landlordzone.co.uk/forum/residential-letting-questions/1214348-judge-declaring-anything-in-advance-as-a-deposit