I think you need to list the reaons why you think the property is 'uninhabitable' - things like grubby carpets and broken fridges wouldnt make the property uninhabitable. In terms of the fire alarms, all landlords have a common law duty to make the property as fire safr as possible - failure to do this wouldnt make the property unihabitable though. All properties built after 1992 are required to have mains connected fire alarms under the building regs - failure to do this wouldnt make the property unhabitable. So in answer to your question - you are not in your rights to say the property was uninhabital because of non-functioning fire alarms (you could have bought a cheap £1.99 battery operated one for example).

Unfortunatley you dont really have a leg to stand on, the LL entering on one occasion, while annoying is by no means serve enough in the eyes of the law for you to end your tenancy without penalty. If the heating water is still a problem then your LL is obliged to repair this. Set out the issues in writing and the timescales you would like to resolve them in. Add to the letter than 24 hours prior notice must be given and accepted prior to her entering again. I think the LL stance is reasonable - 10% - as your 'breach' of the tenancy agreement, if you do leave, if far more significant than the LL single entery. I cant help feeling theres something more here - your reaction seems compleltey out of propotion to the LLs 'breach'?

I think what you are saying is that you want to erect 10 estate agent type boards in peoples gardens to advertise your business? If so you are likley to need advertisement consent from your local council as these types of advertisements arent exempt from planning control. In terms of 'but with this country as it is, it prob wont be as simple as that', I for one wouldnt want every garden in the county to be covered by signs advertising various companies and their associated tat - would you?

Just a note of caution for future readers - I think there was an argument to be had that IF your ex was known by the LL to be living in the property, then regardless of whether or not her names on the tenancy agreement, in the eyes of the law she could be treated as a tenant just like you (probably more so as she has a kid!). Never assume someones a lodger/exluded occupier. In terms of the response from the letting agents, im not sure why you are shocked at this? You have signed for a 12 month period and have only 'served' two? You need to check if the contract has a breakclause - sometimes at the six month point. Another option is to ask the LA/LL to remarket the property, you will be responsbile for the fees for this and the rent until (if) another tenant is found The final option is to explain your cirrcumstances direct to the LL to see if you can come to a compromise.

From what you have posted you appear to have been served correct notice (are other things inaccordance such as the depsoit being protected?). As stated previously, you should be served a s.21 b if its served during the fixed term, as in your case and a section 21 a if its served during the periodic, so if the LL has to reissue. Have you not been served a s.8 for the rent arrears yet?

What do you want to happen? Your relationship has broken down and at some point you are going to have to leave the property?

Good Luck

Your contract wasnt 'worthless' is just wasnt an AST. You should send a Letter Before Action to your former LL stating that you require either a list of intended deductions and accompany recipts OR the return of the deposit within 7/14 days, otherwise you will submit a claim to the county court without further notice. I would print out and fill in a N1 claim form (no need to sign at this stage) and send it along with your LBA to show you mean business. If after 7/14 days, if you havent heard back, submit the claim form.

You have broken the agreement if you are not actually using the breakclause - sorry I didnt pick up on this in your first post. Subsequently the amounts appear more reasonable. Whats more cost effective - activating the breakclause correctly and paying the rent until April OR paying the £500 + £285? (Keep in mind your also likley to be responsible for rent until a new tenant is found)?

If you paid two months rent then for this to be anything other than a deposit - you shouldnt have made another rent payment until month 3. If at the end of the tenancy the LL has a months rent of you, its clearly a deposit and should have been protected accrodingly.

A little confusing! 1) The breakclause - what is the wording of the breakclause? does the break clause include the £287.50 fee? or is this in a seperate clause - if it is in a seperate clause then does the wording link them in anyway? - A break clause is normally free to action - I think/you the agents/your Gran are incorrectly linking two unrelated clasues? - Therefore if you have actioned the breakclause correctly, there should be no fee at all. I would stongly dispute this - all the way to the TDS arbitration OR Court if necessary. The agents commision has nothing to do with you. 2) As you are ending the contract early (I assume you had a shared tenancy agreement a paid a single amout for the property - as aposed to an agreement each and two seperate payments) there is no need to find a replacement tenant, therefore the £287.50 fee is also not payable. Again I would stongly dispute this - all the way to the TDS arbitration OR Court if necessary. The agents commision has nothing to do with you. In a nutshell - the agents are trying it on. A calm letter saying that as you have neither broke the tenancy agreement or are intending to find a replacement tenant they will be getting a grand total of £0 from you. The Nerve! 2)

Well TDS provides a number of case studys so you can see on whos side they come down on in various scenarios http://www.thedisputeservice.co.uk/index.php?p=206 And there are some further examples here: http://www.idrs.ltd.uk/?p=9&lang=e Your dispute seems reasonably straight forward. In terms of the 'evidence' you have available, if you are concerned that the only 'evidence' is the check out report held by the letting agents what are you going to show in court where the onus to rebute the othersides case is likley to be significantly more?

There website says there decision is binding in so much that they dont have a appeals procedure for decisions you dont agree with, it certainly doesnt mean (or say so as far as I can see) that this precludes you taking court action. You should note that any court case is likley to be significantly disadvantaged (I suspect in the same way going straight to court and not using arbitration in the first place) should you recieve a decision against you - sort of a catch 22!! Are you an EU citizen? - you are better ringing the courts and asking who can and cannot use the court process.

Absolutley 100% positive. No company can remove our right to access to the civil justice system. But why wouldnt you accept the findings of arbitration? They are impartial.

There is always recourse to the courts. You should use the arbitration scheme, thats whats it therefore. If you dont, the court will ask you why you havent used it - what will your answer be?

Court should be last resort. You should always use the arbitration service in the first instance.

I suspect what will happen is that you will simply get another letter the month after your first reduced payment increasing the rent to the correct level (or maybe more?). Result will be that you may save £75 for one month, but will have dented your relationship with your LL.

Its obviously an error and like all other errors will eventually be picked up on. You are best coming clean in MHO.

As a rough guide: if the property is in England/Wales; the rent is less than £100,000 pa; and she doesnt live with her LL Then its likley to be an AST.

For comparison, I live in a 2 bed flat in Manchester with a water meter. My 6 month bill normally works out at about £280 to £300 - thats with power shower/dishwasher etc.

I think its important that mariner51 indicates why they disagree with the common assertion on here (and most similar forums) that a tenant is not required to give notice if they wish to move out at the end of the fixed term? There are a variety of sources out there which all agree that notice to end the fixed term (I would siggest the clues in the name - fixed term) isnt required, not least: - OFT; - Comunities and Local Gov Guidance; - Shelter; - CAB; and - various case studies of the TDS arbitration process findings where just such an issue has arisen. All of them agree that tenant notice to stop a periodic arising is not required. I therefore conclude, O/P, that mariner51 and your agents are incorrect. I suggest you write to them and let them know that you will be leaving on 13th February and they need to arrange a mutually convenient checkout.

Let us know if you need anything more.

I think you have been misinformed, I dont believe theres a special catagory on 'housing issues' in the same way there isnt a special catagory called 'civil issues'. For claims based on simple contract law and debt, the limitation period is 6 years.

I am assuming your in England/Wales and have an AST agreement - if so why was your deposit not protected in one of the TDS schemes? - have you rang all three of them and asked? Your landlord is likley to be ultimatley responsible for the return of your deposit - have you not got their details? Which address was given on the AST for the service of notices? was it the closed down agency? You can find out the owner of your property - and therefore the likley LL - by doing an online land registery search for a couple of quid.

As far as I am aware rent arrears are a debt like any other and subject to the same six year period for reclaiming,