Do Landlords Need to Renew Tenancy Agreements?

Eric, my point relates to claiming on a fixed term deposit before it becomes periodic. Don't be distracted by the stupid penalties
which confuse the purpose of tenancy deposits!

Why do you think 215B in clause 31 of The Deregulation Bill has
been proposed if I am wrong?

Jerry,

I'm sorry but I really don't understand what you're saying because there is no proof in what you have claimed and now you seem to be skirting around the points that you originally raised. I'm sure there are 100s of proposed legislations but how many of them will actually get passed? Surely we should be concerned with the current legislation and not what might be?

Your first comment was about superstrike but that is only relevant to a very specific case when a tenancy becomes periodic after the deposit was secured and the deposit wasn't secured. It doesn't even make a periodic tenancy any less appealing. Then you say "you MUST account for the previous deposit and MUST re-protect the deposit." which actually isn't definitive and you couldn't provide any proof/legislation, only proof that the PI needs to be reserved (we already knew that). Then you moved the subject onto a proposed legislation which has yet to be passed. You haven't really proved anything and have passed opinions off as facts. sorry to sound harsh but its true.

Last year I 3 times successfully claimed portions from different tenants deposit to cover vandalism during a periodic tenancy. I don't know why you are implying that you cant claim or its more difficult to claim when the tenancy is periodic. I would like to say for the final time there is no legislation in place to support what you are saying. I will happily believe you and apologise for my ignorance if you provide me with actual proof instead of wishy washy responses which cannot be proved and are not relevant at this point of time.

All I can say is that Eric is correct and what an interesting read the article and the comments have been. Enlightening.

Sorry I was meant to say "Your first comment was about superstrike but that is only relevant to a very specific case when a tenancy becomes periodic after the deposit scheme was introduced and the deposit wasn't secured."

What I have wrote before doesn't make sense!

Eric, thanks for your consideration, I have no desire to be in conflict with you but merely attempting to caution landlords as
to the situation as it plays-out in a courtroom.

Parliament creates legislation which is interpreted by the Judiciary. HA 2004 s213/214/215 is poorly drafted. If the
courts become involved they will follow the guidance of
precedents on interpretation. Read through Tiensia v Vision Enterprises and you will see how exacting the judicial
interpretation is. The Judiciary identify loopholes in
legislation and then new legislation patches up the loophole.
I am sure you are aware of this process and it is by it's
very nature ongoing.

The proof that you rightly demand is illusory and the art of
good business is to be ahead of the curve and plan for all
contingencies.

To simplify matters, forget about the wretched penalties for
now and focus on the fact that as there are two separate
tenancies, (fixed term followed by periodic), there must be
two deposits. It is in the interests of landlords to close-out
all damage queries at the end of the fixed term, that is a
fact as stated in paragraph 38 of Superstrike, please refer
to it.

Without money actually changing hands, the tenant does pay
a second deposit to the landlord, see para 36 of Superstrike.
The tenant should top-up the deposit at that transition for
any damages but only if the landlord claims. All this talk
of 'hey, no worries just let it roll-over' is naïve, as a
set-off agreement is then established, so in not claiming,
a landlord will have written-off any damages. To claim later
would then be a breach of agreement and will be dismissed by
a court.

At the end of the periodic term, the second deposit only covers the
damages that occurred during the periodic agreement. A slippery
tenant could say 'prove that the damage occurred during the
periodic term' and argue all damage occurred during the fixed term
which by then is settled by a nil payment set-off agreement.
The burden of proof rests with the landlord, so the tenant's
denial must be demonstrably over-ruled with evidential proof,
ie., signed and dated photo evidence and check-out papers from
the end of the fixed term.

Landlords must be pro-active and act on all possible interpretations
and eventualities. I know several landlords who now do not take
deposits ( only first-and-last month ) and real hard-nosed operators who serve a s.21 eviction notice at the same time as signing a lease! Control freaks maybe but they have had very bad
experiences and take no chances.

Superstrike just reminds everyone what HA1988 stated about periodic leases: It's a new lease, return to 'Go' and comply
with all obligations. The Judiciary impose the penalties,
not parliament, so it's them you have to convince. That's the
process, that's how the law works. Any barristers on here please
comment - solicitors keep quiet please ( :

My point is make sure you inspect for damages at the end of
a fixed term and re-set the deposit details letting the scheme
provider know a new tenancy has commenced. Re-protection aids
landlords as it demonstrates due diligence in complying with
their duty of care in handling the tenant's deposit monies.

You are free to do as you think best, I only wish I could counter
you on a betting exchange as I will lay odds you will lose in court
and make a tidy profit.

Tenants are very cute. I signed one in for just 2 months although they can't be evicted within first 6 months by law unless 2 months in arrears. He's 'just' under 2 months arrears and always will be till he's moved on to the next mug. These days, paying bills is 'simply not done old boy'!

I still don't understand your point Jerry. You have reduced your point to "The proof that you rightly demand is illusory and the art of good business is to be ahead of the curve and plan for all contingencies." from "you MUST account for the previous deposit and MUST re-protect the deposit."

All your really saying is "I think you should re-protect the deposit when a tenancy becomes periodic" Until the Supreme Court makes an example out of a case there is no substance in what you're saying, your just telling us what you think might happen.

But I still don't understand how any of this makes periodic tenancies any less appealing, that was your actual point. Let's go back to the start, your first comment was "'Let it roll'? - err, sheer stupidity methinks." WHY IS IT? All you really said afterwards is "I think you should re-protect the deposit" but that doesn't mean letting the tencny become periodic is stupid.

Agree to disagree.

Did anyone see Britain on Benefits life on the dole, giving out all the wrong messages. Basically run up arrears, get away with it, and move on!

Eric, good luck in your business endeavours, you are
clearly wedded to your ignorance. I have no desire
to continue here as tenants read this blog too and will
readily catch on to the power of their statutory rights,
HA 1988 handed the advantage to tenants. Amen.

Rent in peace

How can it be their statutory right if the superstrike outcome was decided in a COUNTY COURT?

Goodluck too, with preaching fictional legislations.

Peace.

P.s. no hard feelings!

The Court of Appeal is just tad more important than the
small claims track in the County Court in the scheme of things.

The Superstrike judgement is not dissimilar to Marcel Proust's
'A La Recherché De Temps Perdu' . . . Many quote it but few
have actually read it.

Superstrike is a cracking read, best prose in the English language
since 'Moby Dick'. Oh boy, is it ever a gripping page-turner!
Google it and it's there for free. Enjoy.

Nough of this! I'm going where the money is, the Bahamas, O.B.P.A.P. (Our Benefit Pals Are Paying)!

Great post, one edit, you have said RESERVED but it is actually re-served, i.e. you have to serve it again, not a copy but a new PI with information on it that related to periodic tenancy.

You are right that Agents are scum sucking leeches, they charge both the Landlord and the Tenant for this dangerous work. All Agent fees should be for landlords only, they are a cost of doing business and deductible from tax profit.

My last Landlord was dead against periodic, insisted on 2 year contracts which was fine, but then tried to pull out when management company put up fees.

We ended up on periodic and he then went on to serve Section 21 as notice. Problem was he had not protected deposit, had not served prescribed info of original lease never mind the periodic. We went back and forth, I practically told him what he needed to do but he kept screwing it up. He also tried getting "heavy" which got him in even more trouble. Then they tried "riding" the terms of the lease which got his lease thrown out for unfair contact terms. Overall cost him over £10k, if he had not got heavy I would not have pushed things but after that I enforced all my legal rights.

This is not a downside of Statutory Periodic Tenancies but my old Landlord being a complete cnut and failing to do the most basic paperwork.

I totally agree that periodic is the way to go.

Just thought with the mention of tenancy agreements that it would be useful to share with your readers the importance of making a periodic tenancy be a contractual periodic tenancy. This should be stated in the first tenancy agreement. With the changes in council tax laws, and if as landlords we want to avoid paying as much council tax as possible it should be noted that landlords are responsible for the costs of council tax if the tenants are on a periodic tenancy and move out during a notice to quit period. During the period of notice if the tenants choose to move out it does not exclude the landlord from paying council tax. However, if as landlords we state it is a contractual periodic tenancy and tenants move out during notice we are covered and the responsibility for payments falls to the tenant. Additionally it is worth noting that if your tenant is on a periodic tenancy and goes and rents another house (not that likely you may think but it has happened to me!) then the responsibility for payment will once again fall to the landlord. So make it a contractual periodic tenancy agreement to avoid this loophole!!

Re David's post

I am so glad to not have you as a tenant, ha!
Well done though for being tough and holding-out on what is
after all just a business deal gone sour. Plonkers deserve
to lose whether they be landlords or tenants. Right is right.

Did you go to court or settle?

Awesome stuff - and appreciate you loosing the wet Wednesday to put this together :-)

After much deliberation, I have decided to offer my services to tenants on a no-win-no-fee basis as a lay representative to advance claims against landlords for failing to either re-protect and/or re-serve PI.

If it takes a wolf to turn on the wolves in order for the message
to really get home, then so be it.

I leave it to the discretion of the site moderator to disclose my email contact details, or, delete this post.

The tables have turned. After 15 years at it there are now few rogue landlords these days as they've been weeded out, but there are many rogue tenants! Landlord' is still a dirty word though!

In most tenancy agreements it is stated that the tenancy will role onto a periodic tenancy this is not sufficient in the eyes of the law! it needs to state it rolls onto a contractual periodic tenancy. Completely ludicrous I know but it is the tribunal courts you have to win over!! And yes I went to the valuation tribunal over a £140 council tax demand - which I won!! Also worth noting the council preach a past case Macattram at you to win the day at the tribunal- happily we have another Maccattram case where this landlord also won arguing contractual periodic tenancy!! Don't pay council tax unless you need to as landlords we have enough expenses.

Hi Guys,

I just bought my first buy to let one bed flat with the tenants in place and the tenancy comes to an end in March 2015. The agent used to manage the property with the previous landlord and as a new landlord, I haven't signed up any agreement with them. As the completion and rent due was only a couple of days apart, they have collected the rent and passed it to me after deducting their 5% management fee (monthly fee).

My question is:

1. As I have not signed anything with the agent, can I renew the contract directly with the tenant and manage it myself?
2. Management fee is a rolling monthly one (as I was told) and hence I can cancel it even though I haven't signed anything.
3. I would like to keep my tenant and renew directly without the extra 7% "renewal fee".

Any help is much appreciated.

Thanks

I'm a tenant. I have been at this house for almost a year. Everything going fine, then wallop, I was late paying a month's rent when I changed jobs (my new firm faffed around and the start date I ended up with caused me to miss the payroll that month). So all in all I was a week or so late in paying. This is Surrey - we're talking over £1500 each month.

I wanted to extend the tenancy for another year with a six month break clause simply because I live with family and there are two small babies in the house and we wanted some stability.

Now the landlady is saying she's going to thoroughly reference me again because of the late payment. She's making me feel very uneasy, and is a bit of a bully I feel.

I've been renting now for three years since selling my house and I must admit it has been the worst experience of my life - no stability, no security of tenure, no options to decorate etc. We are now in house number three since selling. It's a joke. Some so called 'family homes' don't want kids, don't allow pets, nothing! Your rights are taken away while the landlord takes more than 50% of your salary each month, plus the £400-500 agent fees and a massive deposit.

Moving would be bearable if I didn't have to find the huge sums of money up front each time.

So, where do I stand with my current landlady? She's a business woman and owns lots of properties so I'm not a person or part of a family to her, just a source of income, which is currently about to increase by £100 a month.

She wants to do employer references which I understand but giving her my employer's contact details (a major firm so no 'mates email address') isn't enough, she wants to see my contract of employment and still contact them. This is very prying in my opinion. And she's talking down to me now since I was late with that month's rent. She's had rent since then which has been paid on time - the late one was just a one-off.

I am at a loss for words and wish I could come into money so I could tell her where to put her house! Any advice please.

Some of us are good tenants and I've improved her home, returfed the lawn, painted walls that the previous tenant left in a state, kept the house absolutely spotless etc.

Just about to become a landlord for the first time. your web site has ben so helpful to my Wife and I.... please carry on with the good work.
J D.

Dear Tenant, You sound like the ideal tenant and there's not many left! Your l/Lord is just being careful as to have a bad tenant is a nightmare as I have had, £2500 arrears, place wrecked, dog shit everywhere and liked to farm! I now check everything so don't worry it'll blow over.

Dear Tenant

sounds to me like you have one of the new breed surrey Landlords who couldn't give a toss about want you need or want only care about one thing and one thing only...money.

Your Landlord is being out of order by enforcing new references on you and it is invasive no matter what the reasoning. If you are adamant that you don't want this person invading your life perhaps you can find a guarantor that can stand a guarantor for the rent which it sound like you will never need. It may satiate them and stop her from invading your privacy but the Gtor will need to be referenced also.
unfortunately by rent in surrey you are likely to face a lot of this all across the surrey 'money belt' as the rent are through the roof and the Landlords know it.

I work for an agency and have seen low income families kicked out on their arses for not being able to pay £20 increases per month which may not sound a lot but when you have nothing something is everything

I was hoping the new legislation would help people fight the rising tide of greed but alas it doesn't so the Landlord will remain in their rights to do whatever they want

good luck...

I have a tenant who has been with us for a year and wants another 12month contract, she wants security and thus the periodic route is not for her. The deposit is with dps, does it just roll and no need to do anything? The guarantor signed a letter based on the original contract should they resign a new letter? How do you handle the original schedule of condition as this is still the condition when they moved in but obviously will now be a different term, does the original dated schedule just get referenced in the new contract? I will include clauses re the new rent document, epc and gas safe. I normally now gets tenants to go periodic to save all this crap!

@Andy

You are best to try and "resell" the period route to your tenant.

For a new tenancy you will have to charge her for the prep of a new tenancy agreement, in reality it can be a simple extended contract)

Explain to the tenant that with a periodic they always have 2 months statutory notice.

If you offer a year with a 6m break clause then the tenant really does not gain much.

For the inventory you have to allow for wear and tear, so if they occupy over 5 years you cannot really expect things to be in same condition.

You could and should be doing inspections and check the inventory regularly.

@tenant

Some landlords get really paranoid when you miss a payment because they are amateurs and do not have the cashflow themselves to make their mortgage payment.

I had a landbytch (she was no lady)once who I was paying 3 months at a time albeit that I was on monthly payments (I was doing contract work and preferred to pay 3 months at a time to avoid any slips).

Funny thing is one time I only had two months and was not able to pay the third month until a few days later. She told me I caused a massive cashflow problem for her (I was still paying 2 months)

The bytch ended the tenancy, I looked at her facebook page and she had just been on a £8k holiday in Bermuda.

I get your concern about security, to be honest there is none and as long as people keep voting the the CON merchants we have at the moment things will only get worse.

Right now the only way to get "some" security is to move to social housing but the Government is taking that away too. If you are paying £1500 a month that is £18k a year in rent so I am guessing you earn over £30k which means no social housing too. The removal of the obligation for developers to create 20% social housing means that there will be even less and the attempt to force right to buy on housing associations will see a lot of them collapse.

You do have to wonder why they want to hurt people who have so much less than them.

The problem is that anyone who is unable to get a mortgage is totally screwed in this country. You might look into shared ownership via housing associations such as Catalyst.

My partner and I have been on a 12 month contract that ended on 8th February 2016. We assumed this went to an automatic periodic tenancy, however we received an email on the 29th February saying they wish to increase our rent from £800 a month to £825. We replied saying we'd like to go on a periodic tenancy and they have sent us an assured shorthold tenancy agreement that states £825 must be paid from the month of March (8th March). They have also said that 1 months notice must be given by either party. My questions are:

1) should they have given us 1 months notice before increasing the monthly price? I realise we werent technically in our normal contract at that point so am unsure on the law for this

2) can we ask for the landlords notice period to be 2 months, the usual amount, or do we not have a say in this? Also, if we contest this, and we ask for a revised contract, do the terms and conditions not apply until it is then signed (i.e. rent of £825 does not come into effect until then).

Thank you!

Hi Kirsty,

If you haven't signed a new contract, you're in a statutory periodic tenancy. While you're in a statutory periodic tenancy, your landlord can't unilaterally increase your rent without issuing a Section 13 Notice, which requires a minimum of one month before the increase can be applied. (If you use the Search facility above you'll find the details so I won't regurgitate it here).

You can ask the landlord for a two month notice period if you like, but it's a bit redundant as they have to give you a minimum two months' notice by law. (Either they don't know that, in which case they're not very good landlords, or they're hoping that you don't, in which case they're not very nice landlords!)

Ultimately it depends how much you want to antagonise your landlord and risk being given your marching orders (although any rational landlord would be reluctant to incur the costs of changing tenants without good reason). If you like where you're living, why not suggest starting the new agreement from April? If you do sign a new tenancy agreement, make sure your landlord issues you with the prescribed information regarding the protection of your deposit.

Looking for some advice on the best option to go down. I am currently letting to a couple who are on a 12 month fixed term contract which ends in June 2017. I have been contacted by one party to say that the other party is moving out, but that they want to remain as sole tenant when the tenancy expires. I usually just let the tenancy roll over to a periodic tenancy at the end of the fixed term, but not sure whether this is appropriate this time given only one tenant will remain. Should I make the sole tenant sign a new contract? The outgoing person is keen not to remain liable. I have seen a few comments here on contractual periodic tenancies but not entered into one of them before. Off to see the tenant who wants to stay this week to see whether it is still affordable as she is on maternity leave at the moment & the other party always paid the rent which is my other concern

@Sam

You could create an amendment to the contract just prior to it expiring that changes the tenants to the sole tenant, that way when the tenancy rolls over to Statutory Periodic it would have the same terms but they would only apply to the remaining tenant.

So a word of warning, what we have here is a couple, he has knocked her up, Mat leave means she will have less income. Assuming it is HIS baby (unless that is the reason for him leaving) he may be prepared to be a guarantor for a new lease in her name, a 6 month AST would be sensible.

It may be that he is moving out so that she can get into social housing more quickly, then he moves back once they get their place. If he stays they will take his income into account and say she can be housed in private sector.

If that is their goal they will want you to evict them some time after the baby is born.

Of course I may be just thinking up a situation that are not their plans.

I think you have to question her ability to afford it, that means bank statements and budget. It may sound harsh but if she can't afford it, better to find out now, issue the S21 this month, as soon as you have seen her and made your decision.

You could have all the potential paperwork with you, an agreement changing the tenants, a form for the guarantee and an S21 dated accordingly.

I would decline to release him if he does not sign a guarantee for her, (assuming you are happy for her to stay in new property).

The reason I say that is because in worst case scenario, it is easier to go after two people than one, especially the bread winner.

If you issue S21 and she does not go, he remains liable for the performance of the tenancy agreement. It's terms carry on into the SPT. It gives you some leverage and some clues as to their motives (depending on the protests thereafter). It is quite reasonable to not release someone from a contract until they have returned the property.

Call me cynical but people change, especially when they have babies, she may have told employer she is going back to work in 6 months, but one that little bundle of mayhem comes into her life she may want to be a full time mother.

So I would ask "May I ask you a personal question? Are you/Is he the father of the baby? Will you/he be supporting her/you and the baby?

How do you propose being able to afford the tenancy moving forward?

Then you can make an informed decision.

Thanks David. The babies (twins) were born last September. The tenant who wants to remain got her mother to be guarantor when they entered into the tenancy (at the agents recommendation as she had a CCJ) for a dispute with a company she had been working for. I use an agent for let only & they did all the vetting checks a year ago. I think the monthly rent was paid by the guarantor this month. I don't want to be unsympathetic but I have concerns about her ability to pay the rent in the long term so wondering whether it would be wiser to seve the notice & let the fixed term come to an end

@Sam

Well at least you have the guarantor, that is a far safer position.

I think the most important thing is to appear to have considered their position.

Nothing pisses people off more than not being able to be heard.

So I would say to her that as things stand she would not be able to afford the rent, she also had a CCJ but her joint tenant mitigated that.

So unless she can give you a budget of her income and outgoings, along with any other facts that mitigate her position, you may be forced to end the tenancy in June. This will cause some stress but it sows the seed of it being a possibility.

Then ask her to compete this Statement of Affairs, to save the data and send you the file.

http://www.stoozing.com/calculator/soa.php

You may have to do the same for the Guarantor if you decide to go into a new tenancy.

Even if you have made your decision, give them a chance to take it on board and if news is bad give it gently, give her the S21 and do not release the former tenant. Say to her that you will support her and provide her with a positive reference as long as rent is kept up to date.

Try to get an idea of her plans, Council or Private renting.

I was evicted and I need a application form to be renewed from assured shorthold which was gone into periodic, an application to courts to wait for applications from immigration for backpay this took place because I became paperless broken, with means of my bankrupt well the courts, should help with payment for eviction and anti social behavior at the front door and the building, for utilities scam.
I need a follow forms from the tenancy to be renewed, court from probation to non molestation orders, to care of no contacts, financial poor.
wafena khan
13b solway road
London
se22 9bg

I started on a 6 month (Assured Shorthold Tenancy) AST, the agent (Yourmove) didn't renew it so automatically went on to a Periodic Tenancy agreement,they realised they missed the bus 18 months later and are now pressuring (daily texts) to renew the AST and charge me for the privilege! I have spoken to the landlord and she is happy as I have continued to pay the rent in full on time. The agent has told the landlord that her Landlords insurance will be invalid if I don't renew to an AST? Can the agent force me to change to an AST when the landlord is happy to continue as normal?

@Pete

In a nutshell NO, the agent acts at the behest of the Landlord.

If you tell the Landlord that if they continue to attempt to force you to sign an agreement, you will have to consider your position.

It is likely that the agent just wants to try and get fees before the new legislation comes in banning them from charging stupid fees.

The reality is that you might have shorter notice option under the SPT (Tenant 1 month, Landlord 2 months), but signing a tenancy agreement without a break clause may give you greater long term security. So if the Landlord was prepared to sign a 3 year tenancy agreement it may be worth more to you, on the other hand 3 years can be too long for some people.

It is important to understand the all of the terms of the previous AST (except those that explicitly apply to SPT) still bind you under the SPT. So if the AST said you have to have the carpets professionally cleaned by a 3rd party once a year, you still have to do it. For this reason I see no benefit in signing another AST other than giving you a contractual minimum term. You could say that you WILL sign a contractual periodic tenancy for 2 years with no break clause. This is an AST that is worded to never expire, so it puts to an end the need to renew.

The thing to do here is to check whether the agent has provided CONTINUOUS protection of your deposit, from within 30 days of the original tenancy and through to now.

Start by checking the links below using your original tenancy date, make a note to see if the deposit is still protected. Even if you find it protected by one, check all three. Then call the company concerned and ask them if the protection has been continuous, I say this because sloppy agents often forget to renew their protection (usually insurance based) which sometimes expires in 15 months if not renewed.

If they did not protect the original deposit and serve you with the prescribed information relating to that deposit protection, BOTH WITHIN 30 DAYS, it renders the Landlord liable for between 1x and 3x the deposit PER tenancy as well as the return of the deposit. In that circumstance it would actually benefit you to sign a new AST because if they did not protect the original and do not protect the new tenancy within 30 days, then kerching, the sanctions pile up.

I am not suggesting you go after then Landlord who seems to be very reasonable in engaging you, but simply pointing out how you may achieve more leverage if things get difficult.

One does have to ask why the agent is even in the loop, your Landlord should kick them to the curb for this incompetency and if a deposit protection case is brought the Landlord should sue the agent for their consequential loss including legal fees.

I have a company let for which the 6-month fixed term was due to end in April but they asked for a 2 month extension. I confirmed in writing that the tenancy will end in June and all other terms remain the same as the original tenancy.

5 weeks before the extended end date, they provided notice to leave at the end of June. 2 weeks later, I asked them for a check out time so I could book a check-out inspection. They came back saying they might need to extend and will come back to me ASAP. Then 2 days after said, No we will be vacating. So I asked if 1430 was a good check out time and once they said yes, booked the inventory clerk. 2 days after that they ring me and now def want to extend. I was naturally a little annoyed because what is going on, I have booked my inspection, advertised the property and have 3 people waiting to do a viewing at the end of the month. This company is willing to pay a penalty for the inconvenience and I have told them we can chat Monday morning. They followed up after the call saying they def need an extension for 2 months.

I want to know are we currently in a fixed term or a periodic? They want to roll on but I don't know if the council tax liability will impact company lets. I don't really like the one month's notice either side so I am tempted to issue a memorandum that states we will continue as a contractual. Also, my fees stated a charge for renewal or extension so I guess that charge would apply too.

The original contract stated we would not increase the rent in the fixed term but we would have to provide 2 months notice. The tenants are great and I really don't mind having them but my mortgage company is now charging us more as it has been over 6 months letting (residential mortgage) so I dont know what to do.

My daughter is renting a house with 4 other tenants (HMO). It is a student let but on an AST. They moved into the property at the end of Sept 18 for a 12 month tenancy. Last week they were asked if they wanted to renew in Sept 19 and that they needed to make their mind up otherwise the property would go on the market. Can you let me know if this is lawful. Thanks

@Emily

What matters is that they have a fixed term tenancy and whether there are any break clauses, the tenancy cannot be terminated before 6 months even if it has a break clause saying it can (assuming this is their first tenancy in the property).

I would really need to see the tenancy agreement to advise further (this can be arranged)

They are under no obligation to give a commitment now (tenancy agreement might say one or two months before expiry they need to let landlord know their intentions by giving notice).

The Landlord can sell the property but it will be with sitting tenants, the tenants will retain their rights.

Assuming they have an AST they cannot be evicted without a Court Order, this would require legally valid Section 8 grounds or a Section 21, but if there is no break clause then the s21 notice can't be served till two months before end of tenancy.

This page will tell you the Section 8 grounds they would need

https://www.propertyinvestmentproject.co.uk/blog/section-8-evicting-tenants/#grounds

It is probably worth checking the Landlord has protected the deposit with one on the three authorised deposit protection organisations (TDS, DPS or MyDeposits) and given tenants the prescribed information regarding their deposits, carried out Gas Safety with a Certificate provided to tenants, given them a copy of Gov How to Rent document, as an S21 can't be issued without these.

Make sure that they understand that they are under no obligation to extend the tenancy to two years and they have rights to stay, even if Landlord issues notice. Let me know if you want me to look at tenancy and I will explain how to go about it.

I moved into a 2 bed place with a friend who was already residing there for over a year, with someone else.
When I moved in, we were given an AST with us both named on it, with the terms stated as "rolling contract, with 2 months notice required"
The landlord did this thinking that she could give us 2 months notice at any time (which she has now done 5 weeks after moving in, so she can sell).

I'm having difficulty finding out whether this counts as a new AST (because I am new) which would mean she can't serve a S21 for the first 6 months.... or if it counts as an extended one, as my flatmate has been there for years, and we are truly in rolling territory, meaning she can serve 2 months notice at any time.

it seems like it should be new, as those 6 months are there to protect me from being messed around like this... but, maybe this contract isn't seen as the first contract, the one with my flatmate is, and this is just seen as an extension (with a new name on it).

Can anyone please clarify?

@Matt

I would not be able to give you absolute advice without seeing the complete tenancy (I can do this via the forum PM if you want).

What you might be referring to is called the Churn of Tenants, it usually means you are taking the place of a previous tenant's contractual obligations and benefits.

However, it sounds as If the AST you were given commenced when you moved in, if so then a section 21 may only be served after 4 months and must have at least 2 months and a day notice, so these two combined give you the 6 months.

Whilst the Landlord can give you 2 months S21 notice, nobody with an AST can be evicted without a Court Order and with the pandemic backlog I am currently working on notices that expired in May to June, hearing are taking anything from 6 to 8 months, but a little less or longer in other places.

You can also frustrate the sale by enforcing your right to quiet enjoyment of the property and refusing to allow viewings, this is a bit tricky in an HMO with common areas as your tenancy will only grant you sole occupancy of your room.

The are other legal obligations that lazy Landlords who thing they and rename a contract rolling and think it overrides the law might have forgotten, such as protecting your deposit. Others ignore their obligation to get a Licence which may entitle you to a rent repayment order of up to 12 months rent.

If you want help on checking these checkout the link below

https://www.propertyinvestmentproject.co.uk/blog/i-havent-protected-my-tenants-deposit/#comment-1021080

Please follow the instructions on post 814 of that page on how to contact me and I will message you with the way forward.

I can draft you letters informing the Landlord of their legal obligations, point out faults in the S21 which make it void and help you achieve fair settlements with the Landlord.

Dear The Landlord,

You have no idea how useful I've found your website and it's now my first port of call as landlord for any questions or ambiguities there are on all matters tenancy related.

One issue I can't seem to find addressed concerns the issue of renewal of joint tenancies. (Perhaps I've missed it on your site, in which case please feel free to correct me).

An issue commonly faced by landlords is where a tenant in a joint tenancy wishes to leave and an arrangement is made to replace him or her with an incoming tenant. One method of this is via assignment, which I know you've written disparagingly about in another article.

However, what if the exchange is to take place at the end of fixed term (in this case a 12-month AST)? The agents propose signing a new tenancy agreement with the outgoing tenant's name replaced by that of the incoming tenant.

They propose this 'renewal' can proceed without need for a check-out and check-in inventory by adding a clause to the new tenancy agreement stating words to the effect of: 'Given that at least one tenant in the original agreement dated X/Y/Z remains in the Property, this agreement thus refers to the original inventory dated X/Y/Z'.

The outgoing and incoming tenants will arrange to exchange deposit monies among themselves at renewal.

Is there any likelihood this will cause legal complications should a deposit dispute arise?

Faithfully,

Johann