I wanted to bring your attention to a deceptive practice being used by Landlords the cheat tenants out of their statutory right to two months notice. It has been dubbed the Sword of Damocles, as under this regime, the LL can ask you to leave at any time without notice.

Firstly, the most certain way for a LL to evict you is by issuing you with a section 21 notice requiring possession of the house you're living in. It is a no fault notice which means that the LL doesn't need any reason to issue it. The notice must be issued at least two months before the LL wants you to leave with the following provisos:

*It cannot expire (that means its time to move out) during a fixed term lease
*It cannot expire in the first six months of a tenancy
*Anytime negotiations are entered into regarding extending the lease, the s21 is invalidated and the LL must issue a new s21 notice giving you a further 2 months notice to evict you. (But in court, the onus of proof is on the tenant so get any negotiations in writing)

It looks something like this: http://www.letlink.co.uk/GeneralInfo/Gener...ion/S21_1_B.pdf

This is all above board when used within the spirit of the law and gives the tenant at least two months to find alternative accommodation.

Where the s21 becomes the Sword of Damocles is when the LL issues you with an s21 notice RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE TENANCY, to expire at the end of your fixed term. This is even when you have taken the tenancy under the understanding that it is a long term arrangement.

If you question the notice, the LL will say something like "it's just for insurance purposes" or "its just paperwork don't worry about it" or "if we get on well together we'll just ignore it" or some soothing fob off like that.

But in reality, once the fixed term expires, you have no right to notice as YOU HAVE ALREADY RECEIVED IT. The landlord can go to court at anytime for an immediate eviction order. They rely on the tenant being either not aware of its implications or unaware they have even been served a possession notice.

There are two instance where this is invalidated
1/ when you sign another fixed term lease
2/ when you negotiate to extend the lease, even if it is to say the lease will lapse into a periodic tenancy.

The danger point for the tenant is
1/ at the expiry of the fixed term before signing a new fixed term. The LL can change his mind and ask you to leave immediately
2/ when the fixed term expires and the tenancy is periodic. The LL can change his mind and ask you to leave immediately at any time.

How to protect yourself and maintain your right to two months notice:

As stated, the s21 is invalidated whenever you both start negotiating to extend the terms of the lease, whether its for a new lease or simply for the lease to continue on a month to month basis (periodic). However you need to prove this should the landlord immediately apply to the court for a possession order.

If you have been served a Sword of Damocles s21 and the intention of both you and the LL is to stay on past the fixed term, you must contact the landlord and start discussions about staying on two months before your fixed term expires, but it must be in writing from the LL, do ensure you insist on this to be done in writing.

If the LL won't play ball, immediately look for alternative accommodation for when your fixed term expires, because from then on, you have no right of notice.

So to be clear, either:
1/ Get negotiations in writing two month before fixed term expires, or
2/ Leave

An important point; if you are living under an expired s21, you can vacate at any time without giving notice, because you have already received notice to leave.

I believe the Sword of Damocles is dishonest, deceitful and sneaky and relies on tenants ignorance of the law to be in place.

Good argument on this here: http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=6803

Yikes! Thanks for the heads up wayneL. Landlords, nearly as bad as banks!

My landlord is sound as a pound, called him about my bed being uncomfortable and told him what I wanted and was only two happy to replace it.

One chunky brown leather bedstead and pocket sprung mattress coming my way in 2 weeks time.

For the S21 to be valid, does it require the tenant's signature?

No.

But LLs often get T to sign. I think there needs to be evidence that it was served. i.e. registered mail or a witness etc., but will double check that one.

Yes, there are some very good landlords. This Sword of Damocles is even controversial among them with many recognizing it as dishonest. Many will not do this at all.

Will he make you cocoa & tuck you in at night?

Not so sure about that, but originally I called him and said I had no qualms in paying for it all and he said, no he should pay, a real nice fella but this is probably due to him being in the game a long time, certainly not one of these new breeds of "Landlord"

I run half of my properties myself, with a letting agent for the other half. I have since found out that the LA issues the s21 at the start of the tenancies also. I can see that they do it to benefit me, but I don't agree with it. It's not very comforting for the tenant to be told "here is the 6 month security you are looking for, but here's the notice to get out. But don't worry, I won't be enforcing it". I will be creating new leases shortly so it won't be a problem.

This all I've been able to find.

I have been a tenant for many years and have had S21 served on me at the start of tenancy's by agents on several occassions. As I have always signed fixed term agreements I never had a problem with it. In fact, I do not see why it is a problem for anyone.

What is deceitful - maybe I missed something? Surely a S21 simply says at the end of the tenancy term (that has been agreed with the LL already) the LL would like to get the property back.

With an s21 notice you can get 'accelerated possession' I believe??

How long does this take, from posting the form to the court, to having the eviction order?

1 month?

More? Less?

The joys of renting eh?

Though it's cheaper than buying at the moment, it would take a hell of a lot to get me to go back to renting. It's a pretty miserable (and stressful) experience.

Hmm, how much exactly?

I went to look at a house last year, 30s detached in Surrey. £525,000.

Today looked at the house next door, up for rent, £1500/month. Identical property, although the rental one was slightly better, in that the extension was slightly bigger.

By my reckoning, excluding any HPI in the mean time, the £525,000 works out £31,500/year Interest/Only (@6%, which is pretty good these days)

And the rent, £18,000 a year.

£13,500 a year saving.

And HPC-proof....

Presumably true value of the house would be somewhere around £300,000 based on current yields?

.

Depends on the landlord. The last two were great until it came to getting the deposit back. Two lost now and counting as they both head to the bankruptcy courts.

Loving the current arrangements in the mansion block. The landlord pays the service charge and we have a delightful caretaker who sorts most of the things out while I am at work.

But I agree with you. Life on the bottom rung of the rental ladder with amateur BTLs is unpleasant.

A lot depends on the situation. Owning (or buying rather) can be more stressfull. If you are settled in your area, own outright or have a small mortgage, of course owning is less stressful.

But with a whopping mortgage plus all maintenance, repairs, insurances, refurbishment costs etc., owning may be far more stressful. If a stay in an area is somewhat tempory, it can be extremely costly buying and selling frequently. Unless there is rampant HPI, is can be financially devastating.

With a good landlord, renting is no stress at all. Even the SoD situation above can be alleviated by the simple tactic outlined in the above post.

Horses for courses mate.

Wad,

There is no problem if you intend to move out at the end of the fixed term, and there is no problem if you sign a lease renewal... or if your landlord acts honourably

The problem is in two situations:

1/ Even when signing a lease renewal, you are vulnerable at the end of the expiring lease. If the LL changes his mind for any reason, say right at the end of the expiring lease, you have no right of two months notice, BECAUSE YOU HAVE ALREADY RECEIVED IT. The LL can insist you move immediately and immediately apply to the court for a possession order. This may even show up on your credit check later, making new LLs suspicious of you.

2/ If the fixed term lapses into a statutory periodic tenancy (month to month), you have no right of 2 months notice AT ALL, because once again, YOU HAVE ALREADY RECEIVED IT. The LL can insist you move immediately and immediately apply to the court for a possession order at any time without even notifying you.

The deception is this: this arrangement is applied specifically to deny tenants of their right to two months notice. Essentially it to protect themselves from rogue tenants, but a landlord may invoke the above against any tenant, for any reason or imagined sleight.

It is a removal of your statutory rights under the Housing Act 1988, via a loophole that means the s21 is valid indefinately, unless the tenant protects themselves as outlined above.

This would entail writing a letter or email to the effect of:

"Dear Mr/Mrs LL,

Our lease is expiring in two months time and we note that you have issued us with a section 21 possession order to expire along with the lease.

We are happy with the house and would like to stay on a periodic basis/sign a new lease if that is agreeable to you.

Would you please indicate by return whether you would like us to stay as your tenants on the above basis at the conclusion of our lease.

As you can appreciate, if you do require possession at the conclusion of our lease, we need to make arrangements for alternative accommodation.

Yours sincerely,

Mr & Mrs tenant.

If the LL answers in the affirmative, the Sword of Damocles S21 becomes invalid, restoring your right to 2 months notice as a new s21 would have to be issued.

Wad, think of why this tactic has been dubbed the Sword of Damocles.

Cheers

Damn right.

Dear Landlord/Landlady (LandPerson ?),

I have just signed a six months Shorthold Assured Tenancy with yourself and notice that
you have attached an S21 eviction notice which will come into force in four months
time, giving me two months to vacate the property by the last day of the six month
tenancy.

I shall therefore apply to yourself in writing in four months time for a second Shorthold
Assured Tenancy for a fixed six month period, to begin on the last day of the
present six month tenancy.

If you are unwilling at that time to enter into a second, full six months (not a month
to month "run-on the current lease) then I shall be making arrangements to leave
at the expiry of the S21 notice which you have served.

Regards

====================================================

This makes your intention clear of having separate, consecutive, six month periods
agreed.

Alternatively, negotiate a lower rent for a 12 month lease.

Any sensible landlord will jump at the chance, given a good tenant, of course.

I agree, but the problem is finding a good landlord. In my 10 years of renting in London prior to buying, my experience was that landlords fell into one of 3 categories:

1/ The lazy old boy: doesn't charge much rent, but lets his places fall into disrepair. Won't spend a penny on them, so you endure thin brown carpets, tatty orange curtains, woodchip wallpaper and furniture rescued from skip. Tends to turn up unannounced, but happy to let you stay as long as you want.

2/ The dynamic duo: husband and wife professionals. Bloke usually laid back, wife a nightmare, always checking up on you, seeing if you have visitors who stay for more than a few days (and accuse you of subletting if you do). Do all the maintenance themselves, so bodged DIY jobs with lots of mastic. Tend to charge a highish rent but think they are doing you a favour by letting you stay there.

3/ The guy with the spare property: he's the SoD type, just letting it out until he decides to sell to finance purchase of new property with his wife/GF - but won't tell you this when you sign the lease. Liable to pull the rug from under you at any point.

Yeah there are those,

1/ will be apparent upon viewing the property.

2/ can be managed by knowing your rights. Always checking on you is breaching your right to quiet enjoyment. You can yell them to piss off, or do them for harassment.

3/ This one is a bit hard to pick unfortunatey

I'm renting due to moving around a lot and have never even met the landlords. The agent has always manged. One agent was a bit crappy, but I gave them more grief than they gave me through knowing the tenancty law.

Otherwise have had nothing but good experiences, but must admit have been careful to try and sus out the situation with the Landlord

We were handed an eviction notice the day we moved into our last house. Rental period was an agreed one year and the notice was post dated to coincide with the end of our agreement. As it was the first time we had rented I thought this was normal procedure, although we have not been given notice in our new house (also for one year).

Anyway, we stayed for our year, during which time the letting agent did any necessary work (a couple of grand's worth) promptly and efficiently and our deposit has just been returned in full, exactly one month after we vacated, as per the agreement.

Exactly (see my point earlier) - seems to have worked just fine for you as well as for me. You stayed as long as you expected and the LL did everything expected of them. The S21 did you no harm. Still not really sure why people think it is underhand. I take the point that WayneL made in reply to my post earlier but it seems like being caught out by a S21 is really more to do with the tenant being unsure about when they want to leave the property.

I guess teh advice is that if you sign up for a fixed term tenancy and then you change your mind the only safe way to proceed is sign a new contract - not just let it run on into a periodic tenancy unless its just for a few months.

I repeat, if you intend leaving at the end of the fixed term and the LL knows it, it is not a problem. In fact it's fine.

The problem is you are staying long term... particularly if the tenancy goes periodic, then is the problem.

You are also vulnerable until the new lease is signed. Read my post again, if LL changes his mind on you right at the death knock you have no notice. You see LL is saying we want the house back officially, but saying yes you can stay on verbally. Read landlord forums and you will see in most cases the motive is specifically to deny tenants rightful notice.

Even ARLA frowns upon it, this statement from one of their chief educators:
A S.21 Notice MUST be "unequivocal" and "without reservation" i.e. unconditional, so as soon as you start entering into negotiations about a further tenancy, or conditional withdrawal of the Notice then you are effectively withdrawing it anyway. The tenant might use the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 to defend a S.21 Notice in that the landlord can't say "I want possession" and then on the other hand say "but I might not"

Look, in most cases, things work out fine, but it doesn't take much to protect yourself against a rogue LL.. and having this knowlege, it would be foolhardy not to.

Cheers

Excellent post wayne you are dead right it's important that tenants recognise the Sword of Damocles method of serving the S21. In case there is any doubt:

There's noting wrong with the landlord serving notice more than two months in advance but really the landlord should only serve notice if they want the tenant to leave.

The Sword of Damocles is a method whereby the landlord that DOES NOT want the tenant to leave serves a S21 notice. This is done so that (months or even years later) when the landlord then does want the tenant to leave the notice has already expired and the landlord doesn't have to wait another two months to start chucking the tenant out. This relies on the tenant ignoring the S21 so that they don't move out, usually done by deceiving the tenant into "not worrying" about the notice.

Examples of the lies told about the meaning of the S21 are:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpo...mp;postcount=48



http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpo...mp;postcount=55



http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpo...mp;postcount=67



This deceit works as:

1. It leads tenant into ignoring the months old S21 notice not realising that it WAS their notice and they won't get more. Not many tenants realise that the notice stays valid even once the tenancy goes periodic. In fact the S21 notice is valid indefinitely unless withdrawn by the landlord, invalidated by the landlord, or a new AST is signed.

2. If the landlord has assured the tenant he can stay on "should the tenancy run smoothly" then technically the S21 notice is now invalid but the tenant can't prove it as landlords know they mustn't put it in writing.

3. If there is a valid expired S21 the tenant is free to leave anytime without giving notice, even months later, but if a tenant does that chances are the landlord will try to charge extra rent in lieu of notice from the tenant.

Examples of tenants who didn't realise the notice was served:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpo...mp;postcount=34



http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpo...p;postcount=135



The "sword of Damocles" is most damaging if the tenancy is allowed to go periodic with a valid expired S21 in place. The tenant can just be asked to leave. Sometimes the landlord who served the original S21 doesn't even realise this:

http://www.rla.org.uk/rlaforum.exe/landlor...s&archive=0



If a renewal is going to be signed then the SoD is still a pain as it weakens the tenants negotiating position. Say the landlord wants to put the rent up. If there isn't much time till the end of the fixed term then the tenant has to agree the new terms or move out. Without the SoD the tenant would be fine letting the tenancy go periodic giving them more time to negotiate the rent. So the SoD puts pressure on the tenant to sign up to whatever terms the landlord is offering or face having to move in a rush. Of course the offer of a renewal should be enough to invalidate the S21 but the tenant will have trouble proving that and so should conduct the renewal negotiations in writing as wayne has said.

Besides if a tenant has stayed several six month terms and is served a S21 each time the tenancy is renewed how can he be expected to take the S21 seriously? He'll think "oh just anther routine S21 that doesn't matter" and then at the end of one term get asked to leave without further notice.

Not that the tenant has to leave when a S21 notice expires. But if he doesn't leave then the landlord can go to court for possession which is going to damage the tenant's references and the tenant will have to pay the landlord's court fees.

To be valid the S21 does not require the tenants signature but landlord will often ask for this to prove the notice has been served. If a tenant is asked to sign an S21 and the AST on the same day (typically the day they move in) then the tenant should put the date and TIME down signing the S21 first. The tenant should do this before the keys are handed over. The reason being an S21 is not valid if it is served before the tenancy has started, again difficult to prove but putting the time down should help.

The new deposit rules affect this too. An S21 is not valid if served before the deposit is protected so expect to be asked for the deposit early or for the S21 to be served a bit later so the SoD still applies.

Note to the mods: Please can you pin this thread. The Sword of Damocles has come up before:

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/ind...c=23126&hl=
http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/ind...c=36267&hl=

and got lost in the mass of posts. Tenants need to be aware of the SoD and many are not.

I got two wierd extra clauses at the end of the agreement which l have to initial seperately:



and




Is this a way of giving notice like the section 21 without it conferring any additional rights on the tenant (i.e. of leaving immediately)?

If not what does it mean??

Yeah not sure anyone is gonna buy a 500k house with 100% loan lol! But anyway, the real prob and the reason Id never rent again, is that you can be evicted on a whim. I was kicked out of my 2nd last rented place. Sure I got 2 months notice. Wow 2 whole months!

Very stressful and that was a 20 something guy moving from a flat. Imagine if that was uprooting a family from a 5 bed house as per example above. Never underestimate the stress of moving kids from their homes. They just dont get it. Packing up a whole house? Well we've all done it - total stress from start to finish.

And then you dont get a choice in the timing. I had booked a holiday in what became my last two weeks of tenancy!! Maybe its a bad time at work, maybe a critical point in your childs education.

And then there's the usual stuff, you cant (or rather wouldnt want to) improve the place, invest in a gorgeous garden, blah blah.

But these things are down to the individual and we will all place different values on this kind of experience. Having been through I would be happy to pay to avoid it happening again. It is actually normal for mortgages to start out more than rents, but then a mortgage is better because it is fixed (IR fluctuations aside) for 25 years and you get a house at the end.


But this is text book stuff, just go to a site like mortgagesexposed and check out the spreadsheets. Yep in any normal conditions renting is better in the short term - its not rocket science. But why would you move into a 5 bed house with short term in mind. I dunno, each to their own. Its one of those agree to disagree things becuase its a personal choice. Im just glad I'll be accommodation cost free in 25 yrs, but maybe living in a big house now matters more to you.

GL.

Well it's nothing to do with the Sword of Damocles, it's not to do with the Section 21.

If you are going to be given notice for these you will be served a Section 8 notice. This can be used to get possession before the fixed term has come to an end although the details vary depending on which ground is used. So those clauses are not your actual notice. What they are is notification that they are grounds on which you may be served notice.

http://www.letlink.co.uk/letting-factsheet...n-8-notice.html

Some of the mandatory grounds, called 'prior notice' grounds, can only be used if the landlord informed the tenant in writing before the tenancy started that he intended one day to ask for his property back using those grounds.

.
.

c. Other Mandatory Grounds (Prior Notice)

The Act also makes provision for possession to be granted on the following grounds:

Ground 1: that the landlord used to live, or intends to live in the property as his only or principal home.

Ground 2: that the mortgagee is claiming possession. NB this can only be of use where the mortgage predates the tenancy.

See here for the length of notice for section 8:

http://www.lettings-landlords.co.uk/info/rec_pos.html

Apart from Grounds 3,4,8,10,11,12,13,14,15 and 17 where 2 weeks notice will suffice, 2 months notice must be given to the tenant that you intend to seek possession through the Courts.

is there history of court cases over early issued s21s?

I know the first thing I would be doing is telling the judge that the landlord told me I had to sign it for insurance purposes and I would then expect the judge to rule the s21 unlawfully issued and as such invalid. The fact there would also be a 6 month gap between the issue of the document and applying for eviction would also go in the tenant favour I think as the judge will be wondering why its taken the landlord 4 months to proceed with eviction.

Personally as well I dont think I would ever sign a 6 month tenancy agreement, I feel 12 months is short term and 6 months seems just not worth bothering with as moving is very stressful and taking into account it takes 1-2 months to settle down and get setup in the property and normally plan a move 1-2 months again there would only be 2 months out of the 6 living settled down. Not much security there especially with one of those 21s pre issued.

The thing with the s21 is that it is a no fault notice. There need not be any reason for serving it.

Therefore there is no defence... except if the notice is invalid through:

1/ It not being filled out correctly; wrong dates or whatever

2/ It having been withdrawn as discussed above (whether intentionally or unwittingly by negotiating a new or periodic lease)

It has to be proven too, so get everything in writing.

There is a way this can backfire for the Landlord. If they've issued an S21 at the start of the tenancy and you want to stay beyond 6 months, you can do as suggested and write after 4 months to enter into negotiations. However, if you don't want to stay beyond 6 months, but they are expecting you will, you can hand back the keys on the day, and walk off. You don't have to give any notice at all. Then the LL is stuck with a void for however long it takes to get new tenants.

Some landlords can give all LLs a bad name.

It seems that the same could apply to tenants...

Yeah, it's probably now got cameras in it...

True enough, but in your quoting quantinghome's post, you are inferring that only a bad tenant would do as he suggests.

Not true, because in fact leaving at the end of the term is exactly what the S21 is requiring him to do. There is no need for the tenant to give notice because the tenant has already received notice from the LL. He/she would only be doing what the s21 is asking him to do.

The fact that the LL is using a nasty little loophole coupled with deception, and actually wants the T to stay (under compromised conditions, i.e. no right to notice) is irrelevant. The tenant is not being a bad tenant, just responding properly and legally to an @rsehole LL.

Until the subsection of LLs who practice the SoD desist, or until the Gu'mint changes the legislation to close this loophole, they deserve every bit of inconvenience the tenant can legally impart. I strongly suggest that tenants do not do damage or breach any fair contract conditions, but no notice is fair game.

I understand completely what you're saying, and, apart from the usual 'two Wrights don't make a Smith', I agree with you.

A better example of 'he who lives by the rulebook...' I've never seen!

Thanks. Couldn't have put it better myself. Now if you'll excuse me I have an urgent appointment with a flame thrower and the LL's new leather sofa

I'm with Wayne on this and I don't quite see why you are being critical of a tenant who leaves when the S21 notice issued by his landlord asks him to. If you were criticising a tenant for staying on after the notice has expired then I'd understand your point of view.

I would never stay on past expiry of the S21 notice issued by my landlord as I value my references too much (unless it's properly withdrawn before I'm comitted to move). I live by the rulebook where the roof over my head is concerned.

Tenants who don't give a monkey's about their references can of course ignore the landlord's notice and make him drag them through the courts to get his property back. Is that what you would prefer?

Or is it you would rather tenants on the one hand ignore the S21 and on the other comply with it depending on the landlord's whim? Only the way I read the SoD that's exactly what the SoD'ing landlords want

Thats my point, a judge can very easily rule a early issued s21 invalid. If its invalid its worthless. Its a loophole in the current law but a judge has the power to decide if someone is taking the **** and rule accordingly.

EXACTLY!!!

You know what? I totally agree with you, but we can only go by what IS happening, not what we think should happen.

There have apparently been cases where an s21 was issued 6 years previous and still ruled valid by a judge. Judges are not ruling early s21s invalid, because the s21 notice does not signal intention, only requirement; a very important distinction.

It's not worth the risk of relying on the judge's common sense.

Which part of 'I agree with you' are you struggling with exactly?

This bit:

Which presumably is a version of the old two wrongs don't make a right Otherwise why did you say "apart from"

Talk about slapping someone when they're furiously back-pedalling!

Oops! Sorry!

Of course and you are right to bring this to peoples attention, as there is also every chance a judge can uphold the s21 and the tenant is out.

There is a little bit of good news on this front. There is currently a review of rental legislation and there is a recommendation that s21 & s8 notices have a "use it or lose it" clause.

The suggestion is that s21 notices must be enforced within 4 month otherwise become invalid. This will scupper the lousy SoD use of s21 as is being done at the moment.

Nowhere close to becoming law yet, but at least it's being addressed.

The links are on my other machine, will post later.

That's right and so it's all about which of the landlord or tenant is most believable, (although my aim would be to get the landlord to back down before it got to court, if I really hadn't had time to arrange moving, as court would be stressfull). It's worth the tenant collecting a paper trail as they go, starting from the beginning by saving the ad for the property showing the property is advertised as a long term let. Also if the tenant confirms his offer for the property in writing (I use email) confirming any discussions had with the landlord/agent, including the fact that currently the plan is the property is available for let long term and the tenant is wanting a long term let then that all adds towards proving how things were. If after that the landlord issues notice on day 1 of the tenancy, only days after assuring the tenant it's a long term let then that's useful ammo for proving the landlord isn't credible. The tenant can back up the claim that the landlord invalidated the S21 by saying the tenant can stay should all go well. (Of course circumstances can change and the landlord can genuinely want the tenant to leave and issue notice but that's unlikely to happen in the few days before the tenancy starts).

If using an agent and the agent says not to worry as issuing an S21 on day 1 is routine and they do it for everyone that's also useful ammo to note down as it shows you that in issuing the S21 they didn't require the tenant should leave when the notice expires.

Besides a paper trail is useful for other reasons. I was interested in a property advertised with a garage but the landlord changed his mind before the tenancy started and wanted to retain the garage for his own storage without reducing the rent. I had the ad so could point out what was on offer ...

A paper trail is always worth collecting and the tenant can help create it by confirming any verbal discussions in writing and sending this to the agent/landlord ...

Interesting news, WayneL. It'd be nice to see those links!




I think that's good advice, EHSTB.

I plan to make use of rented accommodation, hopefully in the fairly near future (months rather than years), and tips like this are always useful!

With respect to S21, I've been wondering how to approach the situation. As a consumer, I often play the 'well, I can always go to someone else' card. But, of course, if all the agents in town issue S21s as a matter of course, then there is no one else to go to. (At this stage, I have no idea how many of the lettings agents in my town do issue S21s up-front; could be none, could be some, could be all.)

If it turns out that pretty much all letting agents issue S21s (stopping me from easily playing the 'go somewhere else' card), what do you think is the right approach? I'd prefer to find a way of simply not being issued one than gathering an audit trail for a court hearing I'd rather not have[1]!

[1] Although that won't stop me accumulating an audit trail, of course...

here's the link:

http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/renting_homes.htm

There's A LOT of reading, but here is the relevant section that I found in volume 1