Table of contents
- What are break clauses in Tenancy Agreements?
- How to activate break clauses
- Serving notice to break the tenancy
- What if the tenant vacates early?
- Why & when tenancy break clauses are used
- The reason I don’t use break clauses
- My preferred alternative to a break clause
- Mutually terminating the tenancy early
- Free legal advice on enforcing your break clause
What are break clauses in Tenancy Agreements?
A break clause is a clause in a tenancy agreement that provides both tenant and landlord the opportunity to terminate the tenancy agreement early during the fixed-term (e.g. the tenant can terminate a 12 month tenancy 6 months into the term). Essentially, either party can “break” the tenancy before the fixed end date, as long as the correct procedures are followed.
However, it’s important to note, the landlord doesn’t have a guaranteed right to possession with a break clause during the first 6 months of the tenancy (i.e. a break clause can only be enforced after 6 months), unless there are grounds for eviction (e.g. rent arrears).
Here is an example of a break clause (please do NOT use it without seeking legal advice):
7.9 Tenancy Break Clause
7.9.1 In the event that the Tenant shall desire to terminate the tenancy hereby created at or at any time after the end of the first six months thereof he shall give the Landlord not less than one months previous notice in writing of such desire and shall up to the time of such determination pay the rent and observe and perform the agreements and obligations on the tenants part.7.9.2 If the Landlord shall desire to terminate the tenancy hereby created at or at any time after the end of the first six months thereof he shall give the Tenant not less than two months previous notice in writing of such desire then immediately upon the expiration of such notice the tenancy hereby created shall cease and be void.
How to activate break clauses
First and foremost, you should read your tenancy agreement and find the break clause in order to determine what it says. You should follow the guidance of the clause.
For example, if the clause states that the landlord must serve written notice of not less than two months, which cannot be enforced during the first six months of the tenancy, then that’s precisely the process that should be followed. Similarly, if it states that the tenant is required to provide one months notice and rent must be up to date before they’re able to activate the break clause.
Landlords
Landlords should send a letter to activate the break clause, which should specifically refer to the break clause (i.e. copy the clause with the clause number) and clarify it is now being activated.
Tenants
Tenants should also serve written notice, commonly known as a tenancy surrender notice, specifically referring to the break clause (i.e. copy the clause with the clause number) and clarify it is now being activated.
In both cases, it’s always best to service letters and notices in forms that can provide proof of delivery, as you may need it if things get messy (which hopefully it won’t, but it’s best to be safe than sorry). The best method of service is usually serving by hand with an independent witness. If you don’t feel comfortable hand-delivering it, the next best approach is special and tracked delivery, which requires a signature.
What if the tenant vacates early?
This isn’t really a problem, and the reality is, landlords can’t physically prevent tenants from vacating early. However, the important thing to remember is that the tenant will remain liable for the rent until the last day of the termination date (based on the break clause end-date).
Why & when tenancy break clauses are used
Break clauses really are about flexibility for both tenant and landlord. They provide landlords/tenants the opportunity to break a tenancy if personal circumstances change. This could include scenarios such as relocating for work related purposes, changes in financial circumstances, or even because the relationship between the tenant and landlord turned sour.
The reason I don’t use break clauses
I personally don’t use break clauses in my tenancy agreements, the reason being is that they don’t seem convincingly reliable (from what I’ve read and been told), which makes them kind of scary to me. Let me explain…
Assuming the landlord is relying on the break clause by serving their tenant with a notice during the fixed term, but then the tenant refuses to vacate and remains in the property. The landlord will then need to issue court proceedings so they can obtain an order possession from the Judge. The Judge will then look at the break clause to see if it is valid. If the Judge is not satisfied with the process that has been taken, it may jeopardise the landlord’s right to possession.
Point being, activating a break clause does not automatically give landlords legal right to possession of the property, only a court order can do that. Of course, it’s expected for the tenant to obey the break clause willingly (assuming the right steps have been taken).
Why wouldn’t the clause be valid? I’m not saying it necessarily would. However, break clauses can be drafted and interpreted in many ways (apparently), and that can create margin for error. If the clause is clearly drafted and equally fair to both parties, the landlord will have a better chance of getting possession. However, if the clause is poorly drafted and deemed unfair (e.g. if it is in the favour of the landlord), it is very unlikely that it will be enforceable.
Ultimately, I think there is a better solution than using a break clause, which offers better reality, and that leads me nicely onto my next point…
My preferred alternative to a break clause
Personally, I’d rather just issue my tenant with a six month tenancy agreement (that’s the minimum term allowed) from the offset. That way, if the tenant or landlord wishes to end the tenancy, they can do without relying on a break clause. But also, and perhaps more crucially, if the tenant refuses to vacate after a valid possession notice (Section 21) (operative word being “valid”) is served by the landlord, the court should grant possession immediately, no questions asked, because the tenancy’s fixed term would have ended.
In the event that after the six months both parties are happy to continue the tenancy, then the tenancy can either roll onto a Periodic Tenancy or a new tenancy agreement can be issued.
Issuing a six month tenancy just seems much safer and reliable because there’s little margin for error in comparison.
Mutually terminating the tenancy early
If at any point during the fixed term both landlord and tenant agree to mutually terminate the tenancy (for whatever reason), whether there’s a break clause or not, the normal procedure is for the tenant to vacate all his/her possessions and hand back the keys.
In the event that the tenant wants to surrender the tenancy without the landlord’s agreement, the tenant will be contractually obliged to pay rent for the entire length of the fixed term. Similarly, if the landlord wants the tenant to vacate early while the tenant has no interest, the landlord cannot reposes the property early without grounds for eviction.
Here’s a blog post which covers many of the legal methods of terminating a tenancy.
Need [free] legal advice on enforcing a break clause or ending a tenancy?
If you think you could benefit from some professional advice on ending a tenancy – whether you’re looking to enforce a break clause, or you’re having problems removing a tenant, you can grab some free landlord legal advice from LegalforLandlords (100% no obligations).
Do you use break clauses?
Do you use a break clause in your tenancy? If so, I’d be interested to see what it says. Would you mind copy/pasting it? Also, has anyone ever enforced the break clause?
Disclaimer: I'm just a landlord blogger; I'm 100% not qualified to give legal or financial advice. I'm a doofus. Any information I share is my unqualified opinion, and should never be construed as professional legal or financial advice. You should definitely get advice from a qualified professional for any legal or financial matters. For more information, please read my full disclaimer.
We didn't get the contract yet, as we were trying to see if we could get a better deal, while delaying everything too.
I'm not totally sure I understood all of this.
We told them we'll accept a 1 year fixed term contract with a 2 months break clause. So what exactly are these 2 months?
Does it mean that the minimum term is also 2 months? Or they can still put a minimum term of say 6 months?
Thank you