evalf

Yes, I did deliver the notice in person to the landlord, and the agent, and both signed a copy of it acknowledging that they had received it. The notice mentioned that I was moving on the 1st. It seems that everything is clear then. Thanks again for all your explanations and replies.

I'm really worried about what Matt Henson posted, stating that I would be liable for the whole month of rent. Does the fact that I'm renting under a 2 year AST, and not a periodic rent, invalidate what he was saying? I had a look at the housing act 1988, as well as my contract, but couldn't find any mention of whether or not the rent should be apportioned. And since I had assumed since the beginning that it would be apportioned, I haven't made any kind of agreement with him.

And another reply while I was typing the last one I'm quite surprised at what you are telling me Matt Henson, as everything I've been reading so far led me to believe that the common practice was to apportion the rent. Maybe the following is what makes a difference: I have not entered a periodic rent: before the end of the first contract, a new amended contract was signed, which transformed the initial 1 year AST into a 2 years AST. We had been discussing this issue in this thread: http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/ind...102531&st=0 I hope that this means I will indeed owe the number of used days to the landlord, and not a full month, in which case I'm in a much worse situation than I initially thought...

Hi MacGuffin, I saw your reply after posting my last reply. Indeed I'll go with the lowest one, but I want to know how much "in the right" I am, if my landlord came to disputing my calculations. Thanks again for your help.

Thanks for your reply the reaper. Since earlier I've done some more research, and apparently the Apportionment Act 1870 states that the daily rate has to be calculated on a yearly basis (which is how I did in my first post), so it seems that the cost of 43.56£/day is right. However I've not found any clarification regarding the number of days that I should use: 3 days when counting the nights, and 4 days counting the calendar days. You say that you would use the number of nights: is this your gut feeling, or do you know if this is how it is usually done? I'm asking this as I'd like to know what I can reply to my landlord should he challenge the way I calculate this apportioned rent. Thanks again for your reply, it is much appreciated.

Hi, I am moving in a few days, and about to pay the last days of my rent. I would like to get your advice regarding the calculation of this last rent, that covers less than a week. I have not received any instructions by the landlord or agent regarding this, but my understanding is that to calculate the money I owe, I just have to take the monthly rate, multiply it by 12 months, and divide it by 365 days, which gives me the daily rent for the property, and then multiply this by the number of remaining days. My rent being 1325£ pcm, I end up with a rent of 43.56£ per day. The part I am not sure of is the number of days by which I should multiply the daily rent. I got the keys of the property on the 26/01/2008, at noon. I am giving back the keys on the 01/03/2009, at noon. My understanding of things is that, since I received and will give back the keys at noon, rather than calculate the number of days left, I should calculate the number of nights. The rent I paid last month covers the period until the 26/02/2009 at noon, which leaves just 3 nights (or 3 times 24 hours periods) until the 01/03/2009. However, I wouldn't be surprised at all if my landlord argued that I am not paying 24 hour periods, but full days, and hence would consider that last month's rent would cover only the period ending at 23:59 on the 25/02/2009, and hence I should owe him not 3, but 4 days of rent, which would include the full days of the 26, 27, 28th of feb, and the 1st of March. Is there some kind of standard for this? I am hoping that my way of calculating the number of days (or rather number of nights) is the right one, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if the norm was for tenants being screwed over the last day. I know it sounds a bit like nitpicking, but since this is more than 40£ I figure it's worth exploring this. Thanks in advance for your opinions and advice on how to deal with this.

OK, in the end I gave the notice today, saying that I wanted to move out on the 1st of March. Went to the agent, then the Landlord, and both made not problem or even comments about the date, and agreed to sign a copy of the letter acknowledging that they had indeed received it today. So all in all everything went really fine, as I don't suppose they'll try to do anything funny now. Thanks to all of you for your advice!

Thanks the Reaper and the Conveyancer for your replies. It seems like, in the case where my landlord would challenge my right to give exactly one month notice, I would have some ground to prove him wrong then, so I'll have a go at it in a few days. I have one more question for you: my contract mentions that "such notice [is] to be delivered to the Landlord or his agent or sent by registered post or recorded delivery to the premises of the Landlords agent." My understanding of this is that I can give the notice in person either to the landlord or the agent, which would be convenient as my landlord operates a shop just below my flat. If I want to do so, however, I'd like to have some kind of proof that would show I delivered the notice, that would be equivalent to the receipt of a recorded letter. I was thinking of printing two copies of the notice, and including a part saying that the landlord acknowledges having received such notice, and have him date and sign it. Would it be enough as a proof? Is there some other more usual way to do it? Thanks for your advice!

Hi everybody, thanks for your answers, and sorry for not answering sooner, for some reason the email notification did skip a few messages. To get back on the details of the contract, what was done is that the old contract was running from 26/01/08 to 25/01/09. In december the landlord ask for a rent increase (!), and wanted to create a new contract from the 26/01/09 to 25/01/10, which would include another break clause stipulating that I could not end the contract before 25/07/09 (so six months from now), and that the notice would still be 1 month. At the time, personal reasons prevented me from tying myself for another six month with this flat, or any other for that matter, so I could not get much material for negociation. In the end it was agreed with the landlord that there would not be another six months during which I would not be able to terminate the contract, but the rent increase was maintained. Apparently, the agency could not make a new contract with no 6 months period preventing me to end the contract, so this is why they decided to do a new contract that would replace the first one, and cover the whole two years spanning from 26/01/08 to 25/01/10. It would still have the initial six months period, but that was spanning from 25/01/08 to 25/07/08, which was satisfying my requirement. and it has an additional article that says that from January 09 the rent would be increased. I must say I was a bit skeptical about this way of doing things, but it seemed like an ok solution, and although the begining of the contract is in the past, the date of the agreement was the real date we signed it. So does it seem like something legit, or would it be contested by a court? If it was contested, would it be in my advantage or not? Regarding the question of the 1 month notice I have to give, I have done a bit of reading since yesterday, and what I came up with was what jonb outlined in his post: as long as the contract does not say otherwise, there is no requirement for the notice period to end on a rent day. More specifically, what I read here seems to say that, although many people assume that the notice has to end on a rent date, there is no clear mention of this in any law. In order to determine whether this was true, or if Matt Henson, who held the opposite theory, was righ, I had a look at the Housing Act 1988, and I had the impression that the Section 21 only applied to landlords giving notice, and not for tenants giving notice. My understanding of legal text is quite limited however, so Matt Henson, could you please point me exactly what portions of the text indicate that the notice I give has to end on rent date? Sorry for the long post, and thanks again for your replies.

Sorry if my explanation was not very clear. What happened is, we initially had a contract between 26/01/2008 and 25/01/2009, which could be terminated under 1 month notice, not before the 26/07/2008. In december, what we did was sign a new contract, that replaced the first one. This contract lasted between 26/01/2008 (the begining of the old contract) until the 25/01/2010 (so for a duration of 2 years). The break clause is still the same: we have to give one month notice, not before the 26/07/2008. So my understanding is that I can get out of the contract whenever I want, provided I serve the one month notice. Am I misunderstanding my contract here?

Hi, I've been renting my flat for a year. The initial contract was due to expire last sunday, but in december a new contract has been agreed with the Landlord, which is basically a new 2 year fixed term contract, replacing the initial one, that spans from 26/01/08 (when I first moved in the flat) to 25/01/10. The contract is an AST, with a break clause allowing me to terminate the contract under one month notice, after the initial six months, which ended on 26/07/2008. I am now in the process of looking for a new flat, and have potentially found one yesterday, so I'm asking myself questions about the notice that I have to give my landlord. The contract states that "The Landlord hereby agrees that the Tenant shall have the right to terminate this agreement by giving to the landlord or his agent not less than one months advance notice in writing no earlier than 26/07/2008 of his intention to do so such notice to be delivered to the Landlord or his agent or sent by registered post or recorded delivery to the premises of the Landlords agent." What I am wondering is: if for example I serve notice on the 5th of february, does that mean that the contract will end on the 5th of march, or does it have to end one the day when the rent is due, which would be the 25th of march? As the contract does not mention that it has to coincide with the day I pay the rent I hope it is not the case, but I figure some kind of law could make this mandatory. Thanks in advance for your help!