Tenant Wants To Vacate Early, Before Agreed Term In Tenancy Agreement
This article was written on 09 Apr 2009
So, what happens when a tenant wants to ignore the lawfully binding Assured Shorthold Tenancy Agreement they agreed to and signed, by abandoning your property before due date? It happens all the time. Until recently, I wasn’t actually sure what rights the Landlord had in this situation. I only bothered to investigate further when a reader informed me she was going through the experience.
Can the tenant leave during the tenancy?
If the tenant has a fixed term tenancy but wants to move out before the end of the term, he or she can only do so if you agree or if this is allowed for by a “break clause” in the tenancy agreement and the tenant has followed any requirements for giving notice specified in the tenancy agreement.
If the agreement does not allow the tenant to leave early and you do not agree that he or she can break the agreement, the tenant will be contractually obliged to pay you the rent for the entire length of the fixed term.
If the tenancy has no fixed term, the tenant must give you notice in writing of his or her intention to leave. He or she must give at least 4 weeks notice where rent is paid on a weekly basis and at least a month’s notice where rent is paid on a monthly basis.
So, as it stands, landlords are pretty well protected in this situation, which is good news =]
What are the landlords’ options?
- Continue to enforce payments from the tenant, as the tenant is liable until the tenancy is legally terminated
- The tenant can provide a new tenant BUT the tenant has to be acceptable to you, the landlord. Until that time the tenant is completely liable
- The landlord may choose to break the tenancy by suggesting that a financial settlement be made i.e. if they owe 7 months – you will settle for 4 months
- The landlord can find a new tenant, and hold the tenant liable for the costs of finding the tenant (advertising, agency fees etc).
- If at any point the landlord approves the actions of the tenant vacating early, then they can legally stop paying the rent.
Attention! If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed so you're notified of all new blog entries.
Talk / 47 Comments
The Landlord wrote this on 2009-04-09 10:52:21
Cheers for the extra details, Jools.
This blog post, and my reasoning for research, was actually motivated by your situation :)
Just to clarify, as soon as new tenants move in, the old tenant legally can stop paying rent, right? Or can you potentially start receiving two rental payments for the same property, from two seperate tenants?
This blog post, and my reasoning for research, was actually motivated by your situation :)
Just to clarify, as soon as new tenants move in, the old tenant legally can stop paying rent, right? Or can you potentially start receiving two rental payments for the same property, from two seperate tenants?
2
Justin Burns wrote this on 2009-04-09 13:14:24
I would always go for option 4. There is no point in trying to keep a tenant at a property when they want to leave - there is normally a good reason for their decision and it is mnormall financial e.g. loss of job etc.
As long as they undetake to cover the additional costs involved in replacing them the Landlord will not be at a loss.
As long as they undetake to cover the additional costs involved in replacing them the Landlord will not be at a loss.
3
Daniel Harrison wrote this on 2009-04-09 13:22:00
That landlord's association sounds interesting. Any more info? Any other good alternatives?
Thanks
Dan
Thanks
Dan
4
Jools wrote this on 2009-04-09 14:24:33
You cannot have two tenancy agreements in operation at the same time so you need to work out the date of change over and if the current tenant has paid for the month, work out the balance you owe them and re-pay it.
www.all4landlords.com is the address. There is a comparison there but I get my insurance through the scheme they offer and it's very cheap. £70 a year to me is very reasonable. Site looks a bit amateurish but Adrian the main man seems to know his stuff and the legal advice is free once you are a member.
If they have made the decision to go there is probably nothing you can do to get them to stay - however hey cannot just walk away from their responsibilities under the AST. Do not accept their leaving under any circumstances because, as mentioned earlier, once that has happened you are stuffed. I have been firm but fair and suggested in the strongest possible terms all along that they seek legal advice or at least speak to a Citizens Advice Person regarding their decision. This way they cannot say that I have been with-holding information or have been unreasonable in my actions towards them.
J
www.all4landlords.com is the address. There is a comparison there but I get my insurance through the scheme they offer and it's very cheap. £70 a year to me is very reasonable. Site looks a bit amateurish but Adrian the main man seems to know his stuff and the legal advice is free once you are a member.
If they have made the decision to go there is probably nothing you can do to get them to stay - however hey cannot just walk away from their responsibilities under the AST. Do not accept their leaving under any circumstances because, as mentioned earlier, once that has happened you are stuffed. I have been firm but fair and suggested in the strongest possible terms all along that they seek legal advice or at least speak to a Citizens Advice Person regarding their decision. This way they cannot say that I have been with-holding information or have been unreasonable in my actions towards them.
J
5
Dr Nogood wrote this on 2009-04-10 01:12:02
"send letters obtaining a certificate of posting (free as opposed to having to pay for recorded - your tenancy agreement should cover the fact that letters sent to the address/forwarding address are deemed as having been received."
Is that a legal clause, or is that like making it 'contractual' for your tenant to take out insurance (illegal)? Surely if you can't prove that something has been delivered you can't pretend that it has just because it is in an agreement (that has nothing to do with Royal Mail). The fucks I send my letters to won't do anything unless it's RECORDED minimum (so I get one of their childish signatures at the relevant address).
Is that a legal clause, or is that like making it 'contractual' for your tenant to take out insurance (illegal)? Surely if you can't prove that something has been delivered you can't pretend that it has just because it is in an agreement (that has nothing to do with Royal Mail). The fucks I send my letters to won't do anything unless it's RECORDED minimum (so I get one of their childish signatures at the relevant address).
6
The Landlord wrote this on 2009-04-10 08:17:36
I don't think that's a legal requirement. I think it's just for security reasons. And then the tenant can't say, "I never received this or that"
7
Jools wrote this on 2009-04-10 10:14:29
Your AST should contain a clause that states (loosley) that the letter will be deemed to be delivered if it is sent to the last recorded address of the tenant. (you will have to check the legal wording). The certificate of posting is all you need. You can of course go for the belt and braces approach of the recorded letter but dont forget to add the cost to what the tenant owes.
I have the following clause in my tenancy agreement:
Service of Notices by the Landlord or his Agent.
13.5 Any Notice requiring to be served hereunder on the Tenant(s) shall be sufficiently served if sent by first class post to the Tenant at the Property or left addressed to the Tenant at the Property or forwarded to the Tenant by first class post at his/her last known address in Great Britain.
13.6 In accordance with section 196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 as amended by the Recorded Delivery Service Act 1962; if the Landlord or his Agent delivers a Notice or document (and retains reasonable evidence of that delivery) required to be served under this agreement or any Act of Parliament to the Property (or the last known address of the tenant if different) by hand or sends it by recorded or registered delivery or by first class post addressed to the Tenant, then the Tenant will be treated as though they have received it.
Hope that helps
J
I have the following clause in my tenancy agreement:
Service of Notices by the Landlord or his Agent.
13.5 Any Notice requiring to be served hereunder on the Tenant(s) shall be sufficiently served if sent by first class post to the Tenant at the Property or left addressed to the Tenant at the Property or forwarded to the Tenant by first class post at his/her last known address in Great Britain.
13.6 In accordance with section 196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 as amended by the Recorded Delivery Service Act 1962; if the Landlord or his Agent delivers a Notice or document (and retains reasonable evidence of that delivery) required to be served under this agreement or any Act of Parliament to the Property (or the last known address of the tenant if different) by hand or sends it by recorded or registered delivery or by first class post addressed to the Tenant, then the Tenant will be treated as though they have received it.
Hope that helps
J
8
Dr Nogood wrote this on 2009-04-21 22:32:25
Charge the tenant where? I haven't ever passed the cost of this onto my landlord when he won't do anything without a recorded letter. I doubt that any judge/individual would consider this 'charge' acceptable.
I am also sure that any judge would not accept anything other than recorded delivery (as a basic minimum) to prove that a letter was delivered (defintely not first class mail). The law cannot rely on assumptions that items have been delivered just because they have been sent through royal mail. Chat to a solicitor.
I am also sure that any judge would not accept anything other than recorded delivery (as a basic minimum) to prove that a letter was delivered (defintely not first class mail). The law cannot rely on assumptions that items have been delivered just because they have been sent through royal mail. Chat to a solicitor.
9
Jools wrote this on 2009-04-22 08:21:48
I have - thats why it's in my AST!
As it is the tenant who is leaving before the end of the tenancy they signed they are liable for the landlords costs incurred in re-letting the property.The Landlord is expecting a guaranteed income stream until the end of the tenancy. Why should they be out of pocket when it is not their fault the tenant is leaving. The law was put in to protect the Tenants right against eviction without cause. In this case it works against them but that's frankly not my problem as a Landlord. The cost of sending them a letter by recorded/special delivery is an expense. There is an obligation to keep the costs as low as possible so you would not be able to put a slap up meal for the letting agent in there.
As for you not passing on the cost to your landlord - thats your problem. If it costs you money to get him to do something - charge him! he won't like it but a) thats business and b) he would do it to you if the tables were reversed.
Why don't you read the clauses in my post above again? They are not something I have conjoured out of thin air!
It does not matter what YOU think is acceptable - it's what the Law thinks is acceptable!
Jools
As it is the tenant who is leaving before the end of the tenancy they signed they are liable for the landlords costs incurred in re-letting the property.The Landlord is expecting a guaranteed income stream until the end of the tenancy. Why should they be out of pocket when it is not their fault the tenant is leaving. The law was put in to protect the Tenants right against eviction without cause. In this case it works against them but that's frankly not my problem as a Landlord. The cost of sending them a letter by recorded/special delivery is an expense. There is an obligation to keep the costs as low as possible so you would not be able to put a slap up meal for the letting agent in there.
As for you not passing on the cost to your landlord - thats your problem. If it costs you money to get him to do something - charge him! he won't like it but a) thats business and b) he would do it to you if the tables were reversed.
Why don't you read the clauses in my post above again? They are not something I have conjoured out of thin air!
It does not matter what YOU think is acceptable - it's what the Law thinks is acceptable!
Jools
10
lizzie wrote this on 2009-04-23 15:02:11
pardon me all for bursting into your thread like this..
my question relates to the same topic but with a twist.
we've signed an ast, clearly staing on the front page fixed for 6 months, and the break clause is for 2 months by either party to expire any time after the initial 6 months is up.
HOWEVER... the person who signed the lease dated the expiry for 5 months from commencement, not 6, and the tenant now wants to leave after 5 months. they gave their notice in writing yesterday (april 22nd) to expire on may 2nd.
where do we stand now?
any help would be greatly appreciated!
regards
L
my question relates to the same topic but with a twist.
we've signed an ast, clearly staing on the front page fixed for 6 months, and the break clause is for 2 months by either party to expire any time after the initial 6 months is up.
HOWEVER... the person who signed the lease dated the expiry for 5 months from commencement, not 6, and the tenant now wants to leave after 5 months. they gave their notice in writing yesterday (april 22nd) to expire on may 2nd.
where do we stand now?
any help would be greatly appreciated!
regards
L
11
Jools wrote this on 2009-04-23 16:15:15
Hi Lizzie,
sorry - is the person who signed the lease the landlord or an agent of the landlord? I am assuming it is either one of them and not the tenant who adjusted the end date.
If the date of 5 months was made by the Landlord or their agent then it is probably tuff ti***es! Any tribunal would say that it was upto the the Landlord or Agent to correctly date the agreement since it was their contract and they should have known it was for 6 months and not 5. On the other hand the Tenant should have noticed and raised the issue but it could be said they were too excited to notice with the thoughts of moving in. Also, since the AST must be witnessed - it should have been picked up by them if they had read the document correctly.
You may have to put it down to experience as, given past experience, the tenant is in a much stronger position.
If the AST was prepared by a letting agent and signed for by them I would say it is their fault and as you were expecting an income stream for 6 months and their mistake means the tenant is leaving after 5 they would be liable to 'pony up the dough' for the last month. I assume that you would have been in discussion with them to see if they wanted to continue renting your property?
Jools
sorry - is the person who signed the lease the landlord or an agent of the landlord? I am assuming it is either one of them and not the tenant who adjusted the end date.
If the date of 5 months was made by the Landlord or their agent then it is probably tuff ti***es! Any tribunal would say that it was upto the the Landlord or Agent to correctly date the agreement since it was their contract and they should have known it was for 6 months and not 5. On the other hand the Tenant should have noticed and raised the issue but it could be said they were too excited to notice with the thoughts of moving in. Also, since the AST must be witnessed - it should have been picked up by them if they had read the document correctly.
You may have to put it down to experience as, given past experience, the tenant is in a much stronger position.
If the AST was prepared by a letting agent and signed for by them I would say it is their fault and as you were expecting an income stream for 6 months and their mistake means the tenant is leaving after 5 they would be liable to 'pony up the dough' for the last month. I assume that you would have been in discussion with them to see if they wanted to continue renting your property?
Jools
12
Dr Nogood wrote this on 2009-04-23 18:16:24
I'd be interested to see what a judge made of those clauses Jools...
I understood that tenancy agreements have to be in plain english...this isn't plain english, it's leagal gobledegook. You're not brokering a deal between two multinationals this type of jargon is totally inappropriate. I would suggest:
"The tenant will be resposible for all reasonable costs incurred in re-letting the property"
I think 13.5 is bollocks. First class post is not a sufficient service I would demand a minimum of Recorded delivery to confirm that I received something (saying it is assumed someone has received something if you can prove you sent it is balls, you have to prove they received it...recorded is the minimum standard). Also if you are charging them for it anyway, what's the prob Bob?
I understood that tenancy agreements have to be in plain english...this isn't plain english, it's leagal gobledegook. You're not brokering a deal between two multinationals this type of jargon is totally inappropriate. I would suggest:
"The tenant will be resposible for all reasonable costs incurred in re-letting the property"
I think 13.5 is bollocks. First class post is not a sufficient service I would demand a minimum of Recorded delivery to confirm that I received something (saying it is assumed someone has received something if you can prove you sent it is balls, you have to prove they received it...recorded is the minimum standard). Also if you are charging them for it anyway, what's the prob Bob?
13
Jools wrote this on 2009-04-23 18:46:28
As I said before - it really is not about what you think!
On the front of my AST are the words "It is highly recommended that you contact a solicitor or take other professional advice regarding this contract if you are unsure of anything contained within" - is that plain enough English? My tenants sign the document because they DO understand the contract - it's not my fault if they sign and can't be arsed to go and get the document checked for themselves. Plain English is all well and Dandy but you cannot always get across the important bits without legalease.
As I said - I have an obligation to keep costs as low as possible.
As for legal gobledegook - I just asked my 10 year old next door neighbour if he understood what it meant and he said he thought it to be very clear.
My solicitors have deemed it to be ok and so it shall remain - if you have an issue I suggest you speak to the post office regarding the appropriate part of the Recorded delivery Service Act 1962. As previously stated several times:
It does not matter what YOU think is acceptable - it’s what the Law thinks is acceptable!
Jools
On the front of my AST are the words "It is highly recommended that you contact a solicitor or take other professional advice regarding this contract if you are unsure of anything contained within" - is that plain enough English? My tenants sign the document because they DO understand the contract - it's not my fault if they sign and can't be arsed to go and get the document checked for themselves. Plain English is all well and Dandy but you cannot always get across the important bits without legalease.
As I said - I have an obligation to keep costs as low as possible.
As for legal gobledegook - I just asked my 10 year old next door neighbour if he understood what it meant and he said he thought it to be very clear.
My solicitors have deemed it to be ok and so it shall remain - if you have an issue I suggest you speak to the post office regarding the appropriate part of the Recorded delivery Service Act 1962. As previously stated several times:
It does not matter what YOU think is acceptable - it’s what the Law thinks is acceptable!
Jools
14
lizzie wrote this on 2009-04-24 07:56:30
thanks jools,
it does look like we may have to chin it, but doesn't the tenant have to serve correct and proper notice, giving one month to vacate anyways?
as their notice was served to us on 22.04.09 to end 02.05.09 (the end of their lease), this is not correct notice.
this is where i tend to be a bit unclear. i always thought notice must be served by a tenant to vacate, regardless of whether their ast is coming to an end?
regards
L
it does look like we may have to chin it, but doesn't the tenant have to serve correct and proper notice, giving one month to vacate anyways?
as their notice was served to us on 22.04.09 to end 02.05.09 (the end of their lease), this is not correct notice.
this is where i tend to be a bit unclear. i always thought notice must be served by a tenant to vacate, regardless of whether their ast is coming to an end?
regards
L
15
Jools wrote this on 2009-04-24 09:25:53
Morning Lizzie,
As far as I am aware the standard AST does not need normal notice to vacate if the tenant leaves at the end of the fixed period, as the AST is set for 6 months and as long as they are out by the final date they have not breached the conditions. This seems it has come completely out of the blue to you and a judge or whoever may say that you should have been talking to your tenant 2 months or so before hand to plan for the fact that they may not stay and give you time to find new tenants to move in soon after vacation in order to provide unbroken habitation of you property.
My AST allows me, within the last two months of tenancy, to show proespective tenants around the property subject to 24hrs notice so I am looking at least 2 months ahead.
I think that the onus is on the Landlord to establish whether the tenant wishes to stay and then take the appropriate action to either renew or find new tenants. Unfortunately the tenant is in such a strong position when it comes to arbitration etc.
Have you lost them or could they be pursuaded to stay? Make your life easier if they do stay as you won't have the hassle of finding new people!
As with everything - best to check from a professional your status and not rely on the musings of me!
Jools
As far as I am aware the standard AST does not need normal notice to vacate if the tenant leaves at the end of the fixed period, as the AST is set for 6 months and as long as they are out by the final date they have not breached the conditions. This seems it has come completely out of the blue to you and a judge or whoever may say that you should have been talking to your tenant 2 months or so before hand to plan for the fact that they may not stay and give you time to find new tenants to move in soon after vacation in order to provide unbroken habitation of you property.
My AST allows me, within the last two months of tenancy, to show proespective tenants around the property subject to 24hrs notice so I am looking at least 2 months ahead.
I think that the onus is on the Landlord to establish whether the tenant wishes to stay and then take the appropriate action to either renew or find new tenants. Unfortunately the tenant is in such a strong position when it comes to arbitration etc.
Have you lost them or could they be pursuaded to stay? Make your life easier if they do stay as you won't have the hassle of finding new people!
As with everything - best to check from a professional your status and not rely on the musings of me!
Jools
16
Dr Nogood wrote this on 2009-04-28 00:43:51
I disagree with you Jools.
I am surprised that Lizzie's contract didn't have a clause in it about notice. I would never expect to just be able to walk away from a property at the end of an AST.
Normally there is a clause about minimum notice period fullstop, in or out of the 6 month period (normally 2 months before end of term, moving to one month when the agreement goes periodic).
I love my periodic agreements. One month notice for me, two months for a landlord to boot me out is enough for both parties and I have zero problem with it.
I am surprised that Lizzie's contract didn't have a clause in it about notice. I would never expect to just be able to walk away from a property at the end of an AST.
Normally there is a clause about minimum notice period fullstop, in or out of the 6 month period (normally 2 months before end of term, moving to one month when the agreement goes periodic).
I love my periodic agreements. One month notice for me, two months for a landlord to boot me out is enough for both parties and I have zero problem with it.
17
Jools wrote this on 2009-04-28 11:58:32
Well theres a surprise!!
18
coraldo wrote this on 2009-04-30 12:52:07
if the date makes the length of the agreement any less than 6 months then the contract is actually void. In the eyes of the law the minimum period it should last for is 6 months and this doesn't matter what is written on the froint of it etc it goes on the dates of start and finish that are stipulated in the agreement.
regards
someone that has learned the hard way from this!!
regards
someone that has learned the hard way from this!!
19
epinoa wrote this on 2009-07-11 13:44:04
Some of the landlords on this page are living in fantasy land.
We are currently in the biggest depression in living memory. The fault is clearly due to the housing bubble and everyone has lost money over this. Many landlords seem to think that they are a special case and their investments should be immune. This is quite frankly childish. With all investments their is a risk involved. At the bottom of all investment ads it says "investments can go down as well as up".
Renters, even professional ones, are at the bottom of the economic chain and so are the first to be hit be a downturn. If you don't put in a break clause and are inflexible the tenant could do a runner and this ALWAYS works out costlier.
In the past renting to ex-pats who were guaranteed by their company was a very safe proposition, however the number of cases where the tenant has had to return to their home country has increased exponentially. Want to try taking on a large company who is not based in the UK? Think you will walk out of it better off? Think that when the economy does pan out you would be able to re-establish a relationship at this lucrative end of the market?
We are currently in the biggest depression in living memory. The fault is clearly due to the housing bubble and everyone has lost money over this. Many landlords seem to think that they are a special case and their investments should be immune. This is quite frankly childish. With all investments their is a risk involved. At the bottom of all investment ads it says "investments can go down as well as up".
Renters, even professional ones, are at the bottom of the economic chain and so are the first to be hit be a downturn. If you don't put in a break clause and are inflexible the tenant could do a runner and this ALWAYS works out costlier.
In the past renting to ex-pats who were guaranteed by their company was a very safe proposition, however the number of cases where the tenant has had to return to their home country has increased exponentially. Want to try taking on a large company who is not based in the UK? Think you will walk out of it better off? Think that when the economy does pan out you would be able to re-establish a relationship at this lucrative end of the market?
20
Jeffrey Jones and Lisa Carey wrote this on 2009-07-23 17:52:43
My partner and I have have an ast with our landlord which lasts for 12 months and the tenancy is up for renewal on the 28th of October 2009. We have since found a more suitable property which we want to move to as we are both wheelchair users and the property is nearer to the town centre for us. What is the earliest date we can leave befor incurring any serious financial penalty?
21
The Landlord wrote this on 2009-07-23 18:44:58
Hey Jeffrey and Lisa,
It should state in your AST- it's usually 2 months. If you want to leave earlier, it might be worth just asking your Landlord, he/she may let you leave without enforcing any penality.
Kind regards
It should state in your AST- it's usually 2 months. If you want to leave earlier, it might be worth just asking your Landlord, he/she may let you leave without enforcing any penality.
Kind regards
22
Feefee wrote this on 2009-07-24 14:08:59
Odv on the first page of my tenancy agreement that my tenant is due to sign next week. It states that they are responsible for payment or the rent for the entire agreed term (6 months). My agreement doesnt contain any break clauses as i want a steady income for the set period. However the agreement doesnt go into detail about if theu leave before the 6 months ie. About being liable for the re-letting fees of the property. Or them being liable for any other costs incurred to the landlord. Do i need to state this in my agreement?
Thanks Fee.
Thanks Fee.
23
The Landlord wrote this on 2009-07-24 15:31:24
Hey Feefee,
If you want to put those extra clauses in, you'll need to put them in yourself, or get a professional to. I think Jools may have a clause like that in his AST's (because he's been through a similar situation with a tenant, and made his tenant cover the costs). Maybe he could copy/paste what he has in place to cover you in that situation.
I'll throw him an email when I get home :)
If you want to put those extra clauses in, you'll need to put them in yourself, or get a professional to. I think Jools may have a clause like that in his AST's (because he's been through a similar situation with a tenant, and made his tenant cover the costs). Maybe he could copy/paste what he has in place to cover you in that situation.
I'll throw him an email when I get home :)
24
Jools wrote this on 2009-07-25 06:08:00
Hi fee. On hols at the Month so can't cut the AST into this but your ast should have something in staying that if they leave before the end of the fixed term they will be liable for reasonable costs of re letting including agents fees. Make sure their bond will cover this so look at the agency fees in your area to get an idea of the cost and set bond accordingly. They will be committing themselves by law to the 6 months and that is pretty well covered by the law but always better to point it out to them in your ast so they can't then say you did not tell them. You could always get them to initial the clause when signing the contract so they confirm they are aware of it! Remember - reasonable costs so no Jimmy Choos or packets of ginger nuts!
25
jo wrote this on 2009-08-01 22:58:28
Hi, I am not sure if this is the right place to post but I was wondering if someone may be able to help me. I am guarantor for my step daughter for the initial short term tenancy. My step daughter has moved back in with her mother and is now going to default on the rent. The rent is paid up until 8th August with 3 months remaining on the contract. Is there anything I can do or am I basically stuffed?
26
Elkie wrote this on 2009-09-10 15:09:27
Does anyone know what happens when a tenant breaks a contract using a 6 month break clause with a 2 month notice which was written as a diplomatic clause whereby they left the country 3 weeks after giving notice did not pay the full 2 months notice? It was short 2 weeks. Luckily a tenant was found and moved in and paid rent where by it was one week which overlapped the paid up notice. We are now being asked to pay back the rent to the first tenant. We were told that as it was a diplomatic clause that the 2 month notice period was a payment in order for them to break the contract earlier due to a number of conditions one being transferred overseas which is what happened. We weren't told they were moving out early until we found out the check out was being done early and if we were okay with it. This was 1 week prior to them moving out. I told the agent that I didn't see how I could answer that question as they would have had to have booked a shipping company and container weeks beforehand (know this from having moved around the world) and that how could I stop them. It was then put to me that they would pay the last months notice, which they did not. They only paid up until they normally paid rent and not the extra days to make it to the 2 months notice period.
We've been told by the agent that we have to pay back the money which is more than the amount we rec'd in rent from the new tenant and that we could only claim 1 week of fees we paid to the agent for finding a tenant, when in reality we paid fees for finding the tenant for the whole 12month period and we have now just done that again for the new tenant. Ie overlap of 4 months approx of double finders fee for the agent.
We understood that the contract ended on the date the keys were handed back and that the 2 months penalty notice is part of the fulfilling the contract and not that it ran concurrently with the new agreement as it was written as a diplomatic clause as the clause whereby rent ceases to be collected once a new tenant did not take affect as it was written in to the contract that it would not take affect if the tenant was using the break clause (diplomatic clause) contained in the agreement.
Does anyone know if I have to pay back the overlap of the penalty and only claim 1 week of the finders fee when infact we have paid 4 months extra finders fee from the tenant as well. They weren't very bad tenants, but they did do some damage which they don't want to pay for. Like breaking a fridge door handle on a refrigerator that was 18mths old when they moved in. Also the door doesn't seal now and you can see in to the refrigerator. Obviously something untoward happened to the door and they aren't willing to pay any costs towards the door. At the moment we are not even sure if replacing the door will resolve the problems as it appears that the hinges all appear bent. They don't want to pay anything and want all of their deposit back. They don't know about the tenant and it is the agent pushing for for the money. They have already left the country. Any advice?
We've been told by the agent that we have to pay back the money which is more than the amount we rec'd in rent from the new tenant and that we could only claim 1 week of fees we paid to the agent for finding a tenant, when in reality we paid fees for finding the tenant for the whole 12month period and we have now just done that again for the new tenant. Ie overlap of 4 months approx of double finders fee for the agent.
We understood that the contract ended on the date the keys were handed back and that the 2 months penalty notice is part of the fulfilling the contract and not that it ran concurrently with the new agreement as it was written as a diplomatic clause as the clause whereby rent ceases to be collected once a new tenant did not take affect as it was written in to the contract that it would not take affect if the tenant was using the break clause (diplomatic clause) contained in the agreement.
Does anyone know if I have to pay back the overlap of the penalty and only claim 1 week of the finders fee when infact we have paid 4 months extra finders fee from the tenant as well. They weren't very bad tenants, but they did do some damage which they don't want to pay for. Like breaking a fridge door handle on a refrigerator that was 18mths old when they moved in. Also the door doesn't seal now and you can see in to the refrigerator. Obviously something untoward happened to the door and they aren't willing to pay any costs towards the door. At the moment we are not even sure if replacing the door will resolve the problems as it appears that the hinges all appear bent. They don't want to pay anything and want all of their deposit back. They don't know about the tenant and it is the agent pushing for for the money. They have already left the country. Any advice?
27
Cheesedoff wrote this on 2009-10-02 13:10:11
ok how about this one.
Currently privately renting, windows rotten, door and door frames rotten and house just failed its electrical safety certificate dramatically and now require the services of a building surveyor as the wall and roof have decided to depart company, leaving a half inch gap! Landlord complete and utter t**t about the whole thing, refuses to accept there is a huge problem with the property.
Contacted the council, who are trying to enforce the work needed to be carried out.
suggestions???
Currently privately renting, windows rotten, door and door frames rotten and house just failed its electrical safety certificate dramatically and now require the services of a building surveyor as the wall and roof have decided to depart company, leaving a half inch gap! Landlord complete and utter t**t about the whole thing, refuses to accept there is a huge problem with the property.
Contacted the council, who are trying to enforce the work needed to be carried out.
suggestions???
28
Cheesedoff wrote this on 2009-10-02 13:12:36
forgot to mention, the property is on a 12 month AST, still have 6 months left on the agreement. were told that unless the landlord agrees we are basically stuck here until the AST finishes and we give 1 months notice.
And they say Landlords have it hard, hes had 2, 2 week holidays abroad in 6 months!
And they say Landlords have it hard, hes had 2, 2 week holidays abroad in 6 months!
29
Dr Nogood wrote this on 2009-10-02 14:12:28
Sounds like a bog standard British landlord.
Arrange a solicitor's consultation. This arsehole sounds like he needs the law putting on him.
Councils are utterly useless, use them to upset his holidays by making sure you contact ALL relevant agencies (such as environmental health) and definitely contact the fire brigade safety officer with regard to their electrical certificate failure.
In the first instance GO TO A SOLICITOR. Chances are he is breaking the law at the moment by doing jack shit (sorry, I should have said 'his job', same thing).
Arrange a solicitor's consultation. This arsehole sounds like he needs the law putting on him.
Councils are utterly useless, use them to upset his holidays by making sure you contact ALL relevant agencies (such as environmental health) and definitely contact the fire brigade safety officer with regard to their electrical certificate failure.
In the first instance GO TO A SOLICITOR. Chances are he is breaking the law at the moment by doing jack shit (sorry, I should have said 'his job', same thing).
30
Andrew wrote this on 2009-10-30 23:54:42
Help me, please.
I moved into my flat in Oct '08 on a six month contract with a landlord, through an agency. My flatmate had to leave after a month, another friend moved in. In April '09, we signed a year's contract direct with the landlord. He persuaded us to cut out the agency because it would save us money. There was no break clause in the contract. He has not writen to inform us where out deposit is being held, as I since understand he should have.
For financial reasons, my flatmate has to return to her parents. We informed the landlord in September (verbally) and he accepted this. He has not made much of an effort to find other replacement tennants and I thought I could move elsewhere. We pay over the odds and there are several, admittedly minor, problems he said he would fix (as indicated on our inventory), which he has failed to do so.
A couple of days ago, he decided to tell us that we couldn't leave unless he finds someone else or we'd be liable to the end of the contract in April. He is now refusing to arrange viewings for the property instead saying we will receive a letter on Monday.
Please advise if there is anything we can do.... I am only moving out because my flatmate has to return home. I'm supposed to be moving to another flat in a week, the landlord accepted we were leaving when we informed him but has now changed his stance.
Thanks.
I moved into my flat in Oct '08 on a six month contract with a landlord, through an agency. My flatmate had to leave after a month, another friend moved in. In April '09, we signed a year's contract direct with the landlord. He persuaded us to cut out the agency because it would save us money. There was no break clause in the contract. He has not writen to inform us where out deposit is being held, as I since understand he should have.
For financial reasons, my flatmate has to return to her parents. We informed the landlord in September (verbally) and he accepted this. He has not made much of an effort to find other replacement tennants and I thought I could move elsewhere. We pay over the odds and there are several, admittedly minor, problems he said he would fix (as indicated on our inventory), which he has failed to do so.
A couple of days ago, he decided to tell us that we couldn't leave unless he finds someone else or we'd be liable to the end of the contract in April. He is now refusing to arrange viewings for the property instead saying we will receive a letter on Monday.
Please advise if there is anything we can do.... I am only moving out because my flatmate has to return home. I'm supposed to be moving to another flat in a week, the landlord accepted we were leaving when we informed him but has now changed his stance.
Thanks.
31
Twattybollocks wrote this on 2009-11-01 10:12:18
Did you have a witness to your landlord agreeing to your moving out before the end of the tenancy? If so you may be able to argue that he 'accepted your surrender of the tenancy'. Otherwise you are pretty stuffed and will have to wait it out.
You can find a ne tenant but it has to acceptable to the landlord and you will be liable for any reasonable costs he incurrs in finding a new tenant. Yo may also lose your bond.
you could however insist he tells you which tenancy deposit scheme he uses and if he refuses threaten to take him to court where you will be awarded 3 x the security deposit. negotiate around that.
TB
You can find a ne tenant but it has to acceptable to the landlord and you will be liable for any reasonable costs he incurrs in finding a new tenant. Yo may also lose your bond.
you could however insist he tells you which tenancy deposit scheme he uses and if he refuses threaten to take him to court where you will be awarded 3 x the security deposit. negotiate around that.
TB
32
Andrew wrote this on 2009-11-01 12:41:58
Thanks.
No, we have no witness, so it'd just be our word against his...
Negotiation is the way ahead - we're seeing him tomorrow.
No, we have no witness, so it'd just be our word against his...
Negotiation is the way ahead - we're seeing him tomorrow.
33
Twattybollocks wrote this on 2009-11-01 13:56:17
Let us know how you get on!
34
frank wrote this on 2009-11-19 00:01:02
I have been a private landlord for ten years and during this time, I have been subjected to death threats, an armed cross bow pointed at me, my property used as a car breakers yard, spray painters booth, the kitchen and bathroom left filthy, white goods broken or stolen - all this aggro caused by tenants..private or dss are all the same...SCUM...and then theres tenants who disappear and I have mountains of letters from debt collecting companies... rent arrears - its a joke..the Law is tipped in favour of the poor sad harmless tenant, the Landlord is looked upon as the baddie. Im waiting for the property values to go back up and then sell and get out.
35
Dr Nogood wrote this on 2009-11-27 00:10:02
"tenants..private or dss are all the same...SCUM"
Yup, you sound like a complete cunt Frank.
I hope your property is in an up and coming gang land crime zone and that the government never offers you a bail out. If you have been a landlord for ten years, I am guessing that the majority of your tenants haven't been scum...or your parasetic fuck witted lazy arse would have been bankrupt long ago.
Yup, you sound like a complete cunt Frank.
I hope your property is in an up and coming gang land crime zone and that the government never offers you a bail out. If you have been a landlord for ten years, I am guessing that the majority of your tenants haven't been scum...or your parasetic fuck witted lazy arse would have been bankrupt long ago.
36
Newbie to letting wrote this on 2009-12-03 01:34:12
I think I may have the record for the shortest tenancy ever.
Tenant signed 6 months lease yesterday, and today, due to major change in circumstances, wants to end tenancy.
Having read all the above I think I have been a bit of a softie as I intend to let her surrender the tenancy in a few days time, and immediately return her deposit, which I have not yet had time to put into a scheme. I was also intending to charge rent only for the few days she occupied the property plus my costs in re - advertising and changing locks.
Just as a matter of interest do other landlord's routinely change locks between tenancies, as I have been advised to do?
Tenant signed 6 months lease yesterday, and today, due to major change in circumstances, wants to end tenancy.
Having read all the above I think I have been a bit of a softie as I intend to let her surrender the tenancy in a few days time, and immediately return her deposit, which I have not yet had time to put into a scheme. I was also intending to charge rent only for the few days she occupied the property plus my costs in re - advertising and changing locks.
Just as a matter of interest do other landlord's routinely change locks between tenancies, as I have been advised to do?
37
twattybollocks wrote this on 2009-12-03 09:49:17
Newbie.
The deposit is void - keep it. They broke the agreement and by law you are allowed to keep the deposit. You are afterall going to have to re-let the house thorugh no fault of your own.
Yes you should change locks but keep the old ones and then switch back at a later stage.
You need to grow some bollocks if you want to make some money in property otherwise you may as well just give up right now. How do you know it is due to a change in circumstances at work and not just because she has found somewhere better/cheaper? Did she tell you it was a change in work circumstances? I would ask for a confirmation letter from her Boss.
TB
The deposit is void - keep it. They broke the agreement and by law you are allowed to keep the deposit. You are afterall going to have to re-let the house thorugh no fault of your own.
Yes you should change locks but keep the old ones and then switch back at a later stage.
You need to grow some bollocks if you want to make some money in property otherwise you may as well just give up right now. How do you know it is due to a change in circumstances at work and not just because she has found somewhere better/cheaper? Did she tell you it was a change in work circumstances? I would ask for a confirmation letter from her Boss.
TB
38
Newbie to letting wrote this on 2009-12-03 13:41:04
T B
Thanks for the above. I had thought about keeping the locks and alternating after next tenant.
You are right I do need to toughen up. I might have a little trouble growing bollocks as I am female, but take your point.
I have only just bought the house as an investment as I was not getting any interest in the bank.
The change related to her children and having to reduce hours at work, and yes, I have been contacted by Social Services who have confirmed at least some of the details.
The bottom line is that she would struggle to pay the rent and if she didn't pay I doubt it would be worth taking her to court as she has no assets, so I decided to cut my losses at this stage.
I am now considering using an agent so I don't get directly involved with any hard luck story in future.
Thanks for your advice
Thanks for the above. I had thought about keeping the locks and alternating after next tenant.
You are right I do need to toughen up. I might have a little trouble growing bollocks as I am female, but take your point.
I have only just bought the house as an investment as I was not getting any interest in the bank.
The change related to her children and having to reduce hours at work, and yes, I have been contacted by Social Services who have confirmed at least some of the details.
The bottom line is that she would struggle to pay the rent and if she didn't pay I doubt it would be worth taking her to court as she has no assets, so I decided to cut my losses at this stage.
I am now considering using an agent so I don't get directly involved with any hard luck story in future.
Thanks for your advice
39
twattybollocks wrote this on 2009-12-03 13:54:25
Hey newbie,
In my experience most women have bigger balls than men when it comes to dealing with people/wanting to get stuff done! They will come!!
Using an agent may not be a brilliant move given they will shaft you faster than a tenant if allowed to. If you are living a long way away then fine otherwise i would sort yourself - at least for a while because at least that way you will learn and can then check to make sure the agents are doing their job!
I see what you mean about no assets etc - BUT you are there to make money otherwise you may as well have your money in the bank earning no interest! At least that way you are gaining nowt without the hassle of finding tenants/expending time and energy!
Hope it works out.
TB
PS - I would still keep the deposit. x
In my experience most women have bigger balls than men when it comes to dealing with people/wanting to get stuff done! They will come!!
Using an agent may not be a brilliant move given they will shaft you faster than a tenant if allowed to. If you are living a long way away then fine otherwise i would sort yourself - at least for a while because at least that way you will learn and can then check to make sure the agents are doing their job!
I see what you mean about no assets etc - BUT you are there to make money otherwise you may as well have your money in the bank earning no interest! At least that way you are gaining nowt without the hassle of finding tenants/expending time and energy!
Hope it works out.
TB
PS - I would still keep the deposit. x
40
asdf wrote this on 2009-12-04 16:01:51
Hi,
I am in a similar situation where my tenant has left the property before the contract has finished. The tenant didn't tell me, I only happened to know because i was there because work was being carried out. There is still half of the contract to go, plus there is furniture that has been broken and will need to be replaced. What can I do in this situation? Thanks in advance
I am in a similar situation where my tenant has left the property before the contract has finished. The tenant didn't tell me, I only happened to know because i was there because work was being carried out. There is still half of the contract to go, plus there is furniture that has been broken and will need to be replaced. What can I do in this situation? Thanks in advance
41
twattybollocks wrote this on 2009-12-04 16:09:28
@ASDF - you have to be sure they have vacated the property because you could be sued for illegal eviction if for example they have gone abroad for a month or are in prison for a month or two!
Keep their deposit (replace the furniture out of that) and then try to find out where they have gone. You have to make all reasonable efforts to find them - ie send recorded delivery letters to last known address etc.
You can't even legally change the locks at this time untill you receive an official surrender to the tenancy. Tread carefully if you want to avoid trouble later on.
TB
Keep their deposit (replace the furniture out of that) and then try to find out where they have gone. You have to make all reasonable efforts to find them - ie send recorded delivery letters to last known address etc.
You can't even legally change the locks at this time untill you receive an official surrender to the tenancy. Tread carefully if you want to avoid trouble later on.
TB
42
asdf wrote this on 2009-12-04 23:12:07
I am sure, i got the tenant to sign something to say he has abandoned the property and then wanted the deposit back. I also posted an abandonment letter, everything in the bedroom has been cleared out!
The deposit is in the scheme and usually they have to agree to how much i get back - what would happen here? The deposit isn't enough to over the damage.
I haven't changed the locks. Is it possible in this situation to still try to claim the months he has left on his contract, obviously unless i can find replacement.
Thanks for replying
The deposit is in the scheme and usually they have to agree to how much i get back - what would happen here? The deposit isn't enough to over the damage.
I haven't changed the locks. Is it possible in this situation to still try to claim the months he has left on his contract, obviously unless i can find replacement.
Thanks for replying
43
twattybollocks wrote this on 2009-12-05 11:05:51
Write to the deposit scheme and explain the situation.
If you have a signed letter stating he has abandoned the property then unfortunately you are stuffed! You have accepted surrender of the property and as such have forfeited all rights to recover the outstanding debt - sorry.
In future you must NEVER accept surrender of the property if you wish to persue them for the outstanding balance of the AST contract.
You could check with other sources that this is correct - that is why it is important to join a landlord association as they will assist you in these legal matters.
TB
If you have a signed letter stating he has abandoned the property then unfortunately you are stuffed! You have accepted surrender of the property and as such have forfeited all rights to recover the outstanding debt - sorry.
In future you must NEVER accept surrender of the property if you wish to persue them for the outstanding balance of the AST contract.
You could check with other sources that this is correct - that is why it is important to join a landlord association as they will assist you in these legal matters.
TB
44
asdf wrote this on 2009-12-05 12:24:18
Hi,
Sorry that meant to say i haven't got anything signed but i am sure the tenant has left, as her bedroom has been cleared out. I have been asked for the deposit but explained that that is returned at the end of the contract.
Sorry that meant to say i haven't got anything signed but i am sure the tenant has left, as her bedroom has been cleared out. I have been asked for the deposit but explained that that is returned at the end of the contract.
45
harps wrote this on 2010-01-19 17:54:57
hi
i have a question or two i moved into a property in oct2009 but have to leave before the 6 month contract is over due to me loosing my job. i gave 2months notice at the start of dec 2009 verbally with witnesses around followed by a written notice and the guy acting on the bahalf of the landlord agreed it was fine as the actual landlord was not in the country.
The landlady has since returned at the end of dec 2009 and she is a nightmare. she has said that i will not get my deposit back as i am leaving before the 6 months is up. can this be done even though i gave plenty of notice to get the room occupied before i leave.
she is also at the flat practically everyday leaving notes every where and also recently had the flat professionally cleaned and wants all the tenants to pay for, even though it was not cleaned when we all moved in. if each day she states she will be back tomorrow is this classed as 24hrs notice.
would be greatful for any advice. thanks
i have a question or two i moved into a property in oct2009 but have to leave before the 6 month contract is over due to me loosing my job. i gave 2months notice at the start of dec 2009 verbally with witnesses around followed by a written notice and the guy acting on the bahalf of the landlord agreed it was fine as the actual landlord was not in the country.
The landlady has since returned at the end of dec 2009 and she is a nightmare. she has said that i will not get my deposit back as i am leaving before the 6 months is up. can this be done even though i gave plenty of notice to get the room occupied before i leave.
she is also at the flat practically everyday leaving notes every where and also recently had the flat professionally cleaned and wants all the tenants to pay for, even though it was not cleaned when we all moved in. if each day she states she will be back tomorrow is this classed as 24hrs notice.
would be greatful for any advice. thanks
46
Just Me wrote this on 2010-01-28 13:52:41
Hi,
We have a property with 4 tenants, all tenants have signed one AST between them for 12 months on 30/03/2009 however one of our tenants now needs to leave - with one weeks notice. She has found a replacement tenant that all parties are happy with, however as the AST is only 2 months from ending how would we ensure that the new AST is legally binding for both ouselves and the tenant?
I understand that a new AST will be needed with all tenants details, is this correct?
Can I amend the old AST/ draw up a new contract and attach this to the already signed initial AST?
Can the new tenant sign an AST, as currently if following the other 3 tenants she is only able to do so for 2 months?
Your help and advice on this matter is much appreciated.
LHP
We have a property with 4 tenants, all tenants have signed one AST between them for 12 months on 30/03/2009 however one of our tenants now needs to leave - with one weeks notice. She has found a replacement tenant that all parties are happy with, however as the AST is only 2 months from ending how would we ensure that the new AST is legally binding for both ouselves and the tenant?
I understand that a new AST will be needed with all tenants details, is this correct?
Can I amend the old AST/ draw up a new contract and attach this to the already signed initial AST?
Can the new tenant sign an AST, as currently if following the other 3 tenants she is only able to do so for 2 months?
Your help and advice on this matter is much appreciated.
LHP
47
Your duty as a landlord is, in this case, to attenpt to fill the property as soon as possible. She can provide a new tenant BUT the tenant has to be acceptable to you the landlord. Until that time the tenant is completely liable. If you are a nice landlord you may choose to break the tenancy by suggesting that a financial settlement be made ie if they owe 7 months - you will settle for 4 months or whatever.
The bond immediately is forfeited but if you find a suitable tenant within say a month you should take out the cost of finding that tenant (advertising, agency fees etc) and return the balance to the tenant. If it costs more the tenant remains liable.
You as the Landlord have no rights in law to break the tenancy agreement early - perversely this law was brought in to protect the tenant from you throwing them out on a whum but most tenants wont see it that way and you will be perceived as a malignant W***er!
My advice - join a landlord association and seek advice - send letters obtaining a certificate of posting (free as opposed to having to pay for recorded - your tenancy agreement should cover the fact that letters sent to the address/forwarding address are deemed as having been received. The tenant can only hand the keys back to YOU personally not your partner/dog etc and they cannot just post them through the door. Any receipt of keys should be met with the reply "I am receiving these keys back without predjudice" as they are forcing to to take them and have no choice in the matter.
Be firm but fair and keep records. I would avoid the telephone as you need to keep records of your actions.
Did I say join a reputable landlord association? My membership costs £70 a year but it really had paid for itself with their advice. This is ongoing at the moment so will write more as and when.
J
1