Assured Shorthold (or Standard Assured in error)?

[jghomer]

I bought a flat in 2004 with a tenant (a couple) in place on what we understood to be an Assured Shorthold Tenancy.

The tenancy commenced in 1993, and a S20 notice was served.

Two questions for you clever lot :

1.The S20 & Tenancy were signed on the same day. The tenants claim that
the S20 was signed AFTER the tenancy (yeah right-ho!). I can't prove otherwise as the original owner is dead, and clearly neither can they. How would this sit in the courts eyes as regards determining tenancy type?

2.The S20 & Tenancy were for Flat 8. But between signing the docs, and the commencement of tenancy 3 weeks later, the landlord was forced to offer Flat 10 instead as the occupant of Flat 8 hadn't moved out as promised. Like a fool he didn't change the tenancy & S20! But would it be fair to say that a REASONABLE person would assume that the new flat (same floor of same building!) would also be on a AST basis?

No prizes for guessing this is a nightmare tenant i want rid of, but he's clinging on to the hope he's assured!!

[jeffrey]

Ugh! What an exam question.
1. Don't know, but it will rest on whose evidence the Court believes. Doubt will probably be resolved in T's favour, leading to it being an SAT (not AST).
2. Forget "reasonable". The Tenancy Agreement (drawn as AST of flat 8) did not let flat 10, did it? Flat 10's letting must have been oral and so an SAT (not AST).

[jghomer]

Thanks Jeffrey.

I thought my position was a bit better than that, but it sounds like i'm doomed :-(

[jeffrey]

Thanks Jeffrey.

I thought my position was a bit better than that, but it sounds like i'm doomed :-(
When you were purchasing, did your solicitor not discuss any of this with you?