Landord gives notice, can leave?

[Woowoa]

Hi there,

 

We received the 2 months notice from our landlord as he wants to get the property back. We found a new flat and want to vacant this property 3 weeks before the end of the 2 month notice given by landlord.We told him we want to leave 3 weeks earlier but he tells us we have now to give him one month notice on the day our contract gets renewed as per the contract states. If we do that, we will be leaving only on the date in which the landlord wants us to leave as per his original notice. We are on a rolling contract, after receiving the notice from Landlord are we still required to give notice to him? This doesn't make sense to me?

 

Any help is much appreciated!

 

Nataly

[honeybee13]

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

I'll move your thread to the lettings forum where the guys should be able to help. I'll leave a short term redirect from this forum for you to follow.

 

My best, HB

[mariner51]

Nataly, IF the LL has served a valid s21a for periodic T, it does not terminate T on expory, it os only Notice that LL may seek court repo order after expiry date which may be several months in futue. Or it may be invalid, many are, hence no Notice has been served.

In both cases it means if you want to leave, you have to serve your own NTQ on/by end of current T period to expire at end of following T period. T period normally commences on rent due date in AST, not nec agreed rent payment date, though often both coincide. T period is the due rent frequency, normally 1 cal month with most ASTs.

 

Best advice is to notify LL that you will vacate T on expiry date of his notice. Until then you remain liable for rent & property. Alternatively, try negotiating a mutual Deed of Surrender, which when signed by both Parties will terminate T on that date, your liability will end and LL can start any remedial work or allow new T to occupy.

Hope this is clear?

[Woowoa]

Hi!

 

Thanks for your reply!

 

It is shocking that the law does not protect tenants in this situation. the LL leaves us in a position to do only as he says, meaning to vacate property on X day (no later, nor before) LL claims to need the money, therefore he is not willing to negotiate even for 15 days.

 

Thanks anyway for your help

[mariner51]

I hear you, nataly but whether complex LL&T law favours either LL or T edepends on your perspective.

These Laws and various amendments are passed by Parliament to which LLs & Ts should abide. It's not pick & mix,

Let's consider the various provisions:-

1. verbally agreed ASTs for less than 3 yrs are as equally binding as signed, written ASTs. Favours T as onus prob on LL to prove agreed T&Cs

2, Both sides are contracted to stated fixed term or equaninious breack clause provisions.

3. Either side can serve reqd period of notice to vacate provided such does not expire before end of fixed term or period reqd to activate break clause.

4. After expiry of fixed term a Stat Periodic T is if T remains in occupation

4. LLs cannot serve NTQ at any stage, only a Notice to repo after end of fixed term.

5. T can serve SPT NTQ which cannot be revoked and ens T on expiry, with penalties for overdtay.

6. T can vacate T on/by end of fixed term without Notice, but LL is entitled to apply cost of nec court action to T

7. Then there is the quesrion of T claim for deposit non-protection

 

Whilst some ind Ts or LLs may feel aggrieved I feel the overall LL&T package to be equitable.

[Godders]

I hear you, nataly but whether complex LL&T law favours either LL or T edepends on your perspective.

These Laws and various amendments are passed by Parliament to which LLs & Ts should abide. It's not pick & mix,

Let's consider the various provisions:-

1. verbally agreed ASTs for less than 3 yrs are as equally binding as signed, written ASTs. Favours T as onus prob on LL to prove agreed T&Cs

2, Both sides are contracted to stated fixed term or equaninious breack clause provisions.

3. Either side can serve reqd period of notice to vacate provided such does not expire before end of fixed term or period reqd to activate break clause.

4. After expiry of fixed term a Stat Periodic T is if T remains in occupation

4. LLs cannot serve NTQ at any stage, only a Notice to repo after end of fixed term.

5. T can serve SPT NTQ which cannot be revoked and ens T on expiry, with penalties for overdtay.

6. T can vacate T on/by end of fixed term without Notice, but LL is entitled to apply cost of nec court action to T

7. Then there is the quesrion of T claim for deposit non-protection

 

Whilst some ind Ts or LLs may feel aggrieved I feel the overall LL&T package to be equitable.

Hmmm, I wonder how may members of parliament rent their homes?

 

I respectfully disagree that it's equitable, certainly when it comes to LLs wanting to seek posession of their property. As it stands the lack of flexibility given to Ts who have been served notice makes it highly likely that they will for a time have to pay rent on 2 properties (unless they get very lucky and find a place that's available on the same day that the notice period ends). This is grossly unfair.

[mariner51]

Godders, many MPs allegedly rent either their Constituancy 'home' or a London flat.

Most Ts served with s21 get a min 2 clear months, often 4 if LL seeks repo order. Even with a s8g8, it will take a min of 1-2 months to get case heard, and T can then apply for 24-42 day hold on repo order.

So most Ts get min 2 month Notice.

Most house owners often have to take a bridging loan to cover sale of 1 house and completion on next. It can take many months to find acceptable replacement property, I know of one couple who took 6 months due to various delays in new purchase, spent in asstd temp accom.

 

Problems arise as many Ts do not budget for next T deposit & 1 month adv rent.

What is grossly unfair is that most Ts do not appreciate LLs who loan them a capital asset, which otherwise they (T) could not afford to purchase.

[Godders]

Sorry I don't understand the points your making in your 1st two paras.

 

As for your final point; people rent out property for all sorts of reasons but in the main it's for profit so you'll excuse me if I don't fall over myself to "appreciate" someone for having the good grace to allow me to pay heir mortgage for them.

 

And the reason many cannot afford to buy their own home (and so are forced to rent) is because the buy to let debacle that's been rumbling for years has distorted the market to such a degree that many are now priced out of the market. It is hard to feel "appreciation" for the very people who are preventing me from buying my own home.

[mariner51]

godders, buy2let is a modern name for private LL operations,. Being a LL is prob the second oldest profession in the world.

You do not have to privately rent if parents are willing to provide accom. Even if you get social (Council) housing, you will be renting (Council as LL) with capital cost of property paid for by Taxpayers.

There is always the 'free' park bench, prob controlled by local by-laws.

Many people buy Lottery tickets in th hope of winning the jackpot (or any prize) in thr knowledge that 29p / £1 is donated to a variety of good causes & prize fund, without realising remainder of £1 is admin costs & profits.

If private LLs failed to provide properties to rent at a profit/at cost, there would be virtually no where for you to rent currently.

[seanamarts]

Please can we keep to the subject on hand and not wander off topic. Thank you.