Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Elvis-Has-Sold-The-Building

Members
  • Posts

    119
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Elvis-Has-Sold-The-Building

  • Rank
    Newbie
    Newbie
  1. If you are going to be on your own then why not find somewhere smaller and cheaper, perhaps a flat as these rents are falling more. Then you can save more towards buying. You already said the high rent would financially cripple you so surely moving is a good thing.
  2. From what I've experienced the agent or landlord usually have their standard contract that they are not prepared to change. Break clauses seem to be quite common but they do not all have break clauses in, I've never had one and have had 12 month fixed terms. It would depend on what the agent or landlord agrees to so it is worth asking them.
  3. Hi LettingsLady, Thank you for checking this out, it's disappointing there isn't any case law as I'd guess that landlords and tenants do get into into dispute over this given the number of S21s that are served when the landlord didn't at the time of service intend to follow up to get possession. (Typically the landlord does say or write something to reassure the tenant the S21 was routine and wouldn't be used unless things went badly etc.). Still it's good to know we aren't missing any cases. I guess that leaves which way things would go uncertain for both sides. I do agree that the spirit of the legislation did intend a tenant should get a definite minimum two months notice, it does seem landlords do have a way to perhaps circumvent this. I'd challenge a potentially dodgy S21 anyway if only to make more time to arrange a move.
  4. There I agree we could do with some litigation on the subject or something from the likes of Painsmith who specialise in this area.
  5. The landlord doesn't tell the tenant anything about whether or not he intends to enforce an SoD S21 as in doing that he may void the notice. See letting ladies comments about the S21 needing to be unequivocal and without reservation. To answer your points in red in the above post (they didn't appear in the quote): The whole point of the landlord wanting the tenant to say for the NTQ duration is to collect more rent and also ensure the tenant leaves as near as possible to the date the landlord wants, perhaps buy more time to line up a new tenant. Therefore a landlord who is awkward enough to serve an S21, have that notice period expire and still not let the tenant go without a tenant's NTQ is also awkward enough to hold the T to an NTQ even after filling in the court papers etc. If you think serving the SoD S21 isn't an offer from the landlord for a mutual surrender anytime after the expiry date then I do not see why the landlord sending off court papers for possession is an offer for a mutual surrender any time after the court papers are served. Neither actions bring the tenancy to an end, both indicate that it may be brought to an end in the future if the possession proceedings go ahead and are done correctly. The landlord may not trust the tenant to leave on time with the NTQ and thus want to action the SoD S21 as backup so as to prevent being mucked about. The landlord has nothing to lose from sending off the court papers, the tenant as the loser will likely have to pay the court fee. So if your arguments are correct it is perfectly feasible that the landlord tries to hold the tenant to the tenant's NTQ whist at the same time kicking off possession proceedings. My point is this makes a nonsense of the whole thing as the court hearing date could arrive before the tenant's NTQ period expires. So I still do not see it can work like you say.
  6. The whole point of the SoD is that the landlord doesn't tell the tenant his intentions. The landlord has a free choice if he is going to enforce SoD S21 or not, it is there for use should it be needed and can be used at any time. Doesn't your second red paragraph shoot down your first red paragraph and make my point still stand? If the LL insisting on correct notice from the tenant doesn't void the S21 then you can still have the case where the the landlord asks for the tenant to serve out his own notice and then the next week fills in the court papers to enforce the S21. Thus the tenant is serving out his notice and bound to stay for that time while the court process is started. There is no need for the landlord to discuss any of this with the tenant to agree a mutual surrender, indeed if the landlord wants to get maximum rent by preventing the tenant from leaving early he is better off not discussing it. This is why if there is a SoD I think the tenant is free to go without a NTQ, if he isn't then all sorts of odd situations like the above crop up.
  7. If your argument holds then it's possible to have at one and the same time: a ) T bound to serve notice (which can easily be almost two months if he just missed the start of a period). b ) The landlord filling in the court forms to enforce the S21. That would leave time for the possession order to be granted while the tenant is still serving his notice. That's mad. Alternatively how about this conversation between L and T: T: I'm off next week. L: You can't go you haven't served a NTQ I want a one months notice ending on a rent day. T: But you are free to action the S21 tomorrow if you wanted as the notice period on that expired months ago. L: You can't leave. T: Right I'll stay, oh and I think you just voided your S21
  8. Hi LettingsLady, Having been involved in the Sword of Damocles thread in the past I thought these comments of yours most interesting. (For the others Painsmith does specialise solely in Landlord and Tenant Law and Marveen has been on radio four talking about it quite a few times). My question is do you know of any case law or anything more concrete from Paimsmith (or anywhere else) to back up that a S.21 Notice needs to be unequivocal and without reservation? It would make logical sense to me that it should, and I'm sure it does but as yet I've not seen the legal argument to back it up. Reason I ask is that as you can see from the Sword of Damocles thread this gets debated and disagreed upon so it'd be nice to nail. Thanks for any help you can give.
  9. What I'd do is ask the agent for the landlord's name and address. Then pay the three quid at land registry online to ensure that the name and address tally with what you have been told. Then I'd attempt to make direct contact with the landlord and explain your worries about the agent. That way the landlord can reassure you and make some contingency plans with you for should the worst happen. These plans could include the landlord assuring you he will cover the holding depoitt and set you up with another agent should the current agent go bust before you move in. Also best if your proper deposit goes into a custodial scheme rather than the agent holding it an using an insurance based scheme, see other recent threads. Worth a shot?
  10. PeterSDE, I take it you have asked for the full terms and conditions of the insurance? If not why not. Surely that should specify exactly what the insurance was for?
  11. sleepwello'nights, If not abused the S21 is effective for the good tenants. I was served a S21 as the landlord wished to sell and as he only served it once he'd decided he wished me to move I made full well I moved out on precisely the day that the notice period was up. (The property was left in perfect condition and I got all my deposit returned). In this case it took the landlord precisely two months from service of the notice to obtaining a vacant property. If the landlord had used the Sword of Damocles then there is no way I could have moved out immediately as I require time to move. Also my spirit of co-operation would have gone as I think the Sword of Damocles unfair so I would have hung about till a good alternative property turned up and probably tried a defence of estoppel against the S21 to prevent having to move in too much of a rush. The fact a tenant challenges the S21 would move the case from accelerated possession to needing a hearing. So the landlord would have to join the queue to await a court hearing, thus eviction would end up taking longer than if he had served the S21 fairly. In addition if this happened to many tenants it would push the more deserving landlords, using the Section 8 with real problem tenants like yourself, into an even longer wait for a hearing as the courts would be much busier.
  12. http://www.letlink.co.uk/GeneralInfo/Secti...ces_Form_4b.htm
  13. My landlord has just asked for an increase too. I was stunned that he's be so stupid in the current market. Not only that he expected me to sign up for another year at the new rent. Now why would I do that with interest rates slashed and rents falling? So now I'll have to go through the tedious process of getting a list of comparable properties to show him. I thought I'd send him the RICS report for good measure. If I can be bothered. Perhaps I'll just leave.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.