More than one in five tenants still have no security for their rental deposits, more than two years after the Scottish Government's deposit protection schemes began.

The schemes were introduced in 2012 to deal with the problems relating to landlords and letting agents who unfairly withhold deposits from tenants.

Responding to an inquiry by The Herald, the Scottish Government said this week that up to August 274,055 deposits worth £182 million had been registered with the three available schemes - SafeDeposits Scotland, MyDeposit Scotland and the Lettings Protection Service Scotland.

But there are over 330,000 rented properties in the market, leaving over 56,000 or 17 per cent of tenant deposits potentially worth up to £40m at risk.

Landlords are legally responsible for registering with a scheme and for lodging a tenant's deposit there within 30 days of a tenancy starting. But Citizens Advice Scotland reports a 48 per cent uplift in 2013-14 in inquiries about deposit disputes.

Fraser Sutherland, at CAS in Edinburgh, said: "One of the recurring questions we are getting now is when a deposit is not lodged, what does the person do? They have to take it to court, and so many people say it is not worth the hassle. I've lost out."

A small claims court procedure is intended to offer a reasonably straightforward way to claim back an unregistered deposit from a landlord, and be awarded up to three times the deposit.

But Mr Sutherland said: "Essentially there appears to be no enforcement on people who are not lodging deposits. Who is going to round up those who are breaking the rules?"

Advisers say the scheme has been a big benefit to tenants in dispute with a landlord over whether all of their deposit, or a proportion of it, should be withheld due to alleged damage. "Until recently lots of agents were keeping money for no reason, well over what was needed, keeping the whole deposit over a broken lampshade," Mr Sutherland added. Now the schemes arbitrate over what should fairly be withheld or given back. "The schemes are a big improvement, but where a landlord or agent decides not to lodge a deposit, we are still in the same situation," the adviser said.

Jennifer Paice, chief executive of SafeDeposits Scotland, said fair arbitration was also a benefit to landlords. "There isn't any enforcement, mainly because a lot of people don't know their rights. A lot of the time it is accidental landlords that come into this market, and trying to find information and make sure you are up to date is not always easy, so we recommend landlords sign up to the Scottish Association of Landlords."

Ms Paice said SDS had recently staged a campaign in university campuses to explain to students what their rights were. Tenants who were unsure whether their deposit had been properly protected should contact the three schemes or check their online databases.

The take-up has improved since last year, when CAS reported that only 50 per cent of deposits were protected and said the scheme wasn't working. But deposits are the fourth biggest consumer issue it deals with, and its says rapid turnover of tenancies can mean that "a tenant can lose hundreds of pounds over a period of two or three years".

Mr Sutherland said: "If we are still short of 60,000 deposits two years into the scheme, that is quite worrying. You should be expecting that to be 90 per cent-plus by now."

Ms Paice said: "It definitely is improving. But we are actively trying to promote this scheme and advertise it, we are working with local authorities to raise awareness, and I would wish the government to do more of that."

Sam Haidar, spokesman for London-based MyDeposits Scotland, said the option of going to court was "potentially very stressful", but added: "If you are the tenant and you have the facts and you know the deposit has not been protected, you are pretty sure to have a strong case." He advised "choosing a good agent".

David Alexander, managing director of Edinburgh- and Glasgow-based letting agency, DJ Alexander, said the scheme itself had "worked really well, indeed much better than expected".

He said "Nine times out of ten, the deposit is returned to the tenant at the conclusion of a lease without any rancour or disagreement. Statistics suggest that in the 10 per cent of cases that do go to arbitration, the adjudicator tends to find in favour of the landlord, although the feedback I get is that he, the adjudicator, is also good at recognising those few landlords who 'chance it' by making a case for retaining all or part of the deposit for totally flippant reasons."

Mr Alexander added said it was also showing landlords the difference between damage and wear and tear.

For example, that it's unfair to expect a tenant to pay for the removal of stains on a carpet that was already five years old when the tenant moved in."

On whether the regime is working, a Scottish Government spokeswoman said: "Our current consultation on a New Tenancy for the Private Sector is looking at ways of giving tenants more security in their tenure, so they can feel more confident in asserting their rights and flagging any concerns about their rented property without fear of eviction."