PDA

View Full Version : Landlord's address- Notices



jeffrey
12-03-2009, 12:29 PM
This thread summarises some rules about what address L needs to disclose, whether to long-leaseholder or AST/SAT/etc. tenant.

LTA 1987
1. S.47: Rent demands from L to T must state:
a. L's name;
b. L's address (anywhere); and
c. [if that address is not in E&W] an E&W address at which T can validly serve Notices, inc. in Court proceedings.

2. S.48: At least once at start of lease/tenancy or thereafter, L must notify an E&W address at which T can validly serve Notices, inc. in Court proceedings. Failure means that L cannot treat any rent (or service charge) as due- it is suspended until L complies.

LTA 1985
3. S.3: If L1's interest passes to L2, subject to T's continuing lease/tenancy, L2 must send to T a Notice that states:
a. L2's name; and
b. L2's address.
[Note that L2 should also send L1's Letter of Authority, directing T to pay future rent to L2].

4. MOST IMPORTANT: The address requirement for the 1985 Act is different from the 1987 Act. By s.38, it must be "[L's] place of abode or place of business or, in the case of a company, its registered office". This need not be in E&W but, on the other hand, a 'c/o address' is insufficient. Failure to notify T is a criminal offence by L: s.3(3)!

animal
12-03-2009, 14:22 PM
It's not quite clear if L's address under s47 L&T 1987 is required to be the registered office?

If not, then is the Managing Agents address sufficient?

jeffrey
12-03-2009, 14:32 PM
It's not quite clear if L's address under s47 L&T 1987 is required to be the registered office?

If not, then is the Managing Agents address sufficient?
Any address will do for s.47, provided that L will be aware of whatever arrives there- 'not knowing' will not be a defence!

animal
13-03-2009, 08:55 AM
If an invoice complies with s47, but the address is different from the previous s48 notice, is the service charge due? i.e. is the address on an invoice sufficient to satisfy a s48 requirement?

Does the s48 notice have to state it is a notice under s48 or that this is the address for the service of notices?

jeffrey
13-03-2009, 09:39 AM
If an invoice complies with s47, but the address is different from the previous s48 notice, is the service charge due? i.e. is the address on an invoice sufficient to satisfy a s48 requirement?

Does the s48 notice have to state it is a notice under s48 or that this is the address for the service of notices?
As s.48 does not prescribe any particular format nor any style of wording, I consider that the provison of an address in the s.47 demand would be sufficient. Remember also that any ground rent demand must comply with s.166 of the 2002 Act too, as to format/contents; this latter is not directly concerned with L's name/address.

longster
24-04-2009, 10:41 AM
In a post recently someone mentioned what section of the L&TA stipulated the right for the T to know the LL address even if the letting was through an agent.

Have had a search through, but can't find it. Can someone please remind me?
Thanks

Lawcruncher
24-04-2009, 12:59 PM
Section 48 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 provides that a landlord must supply his name and address to a tenant and until he does so no rent is due.

Section 1 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 provides that the person who demands rent or to whom the rent was last paid must supply the name and address of the landlord within 21 days of request; failure to comply is a criminal offence.

harry1001
24-04-2009, 13:39 PM
But, correct me if I'm wrong, it does not need to be the LL's home address. It can be any address within the UK at which a notice can be served and the LL will receive it.
If I'm correct then it can be a place of work, another rented property, or even the agent's address - or the mother-in-law's............:-))

jeffrey
24-04-2009, 14:20 PM
But, correct me if I'm wrong, it does not need to be the LL's home address. It can be any address within the UK at which a notice can be served and the LL will receive it.
If I'm correct then it can be a place of work, another rented property, or even the agent's address - or the mother-in-law's............:-))
Read post #1. Sometimes the address must be L's own; sometimes (e.g. 1987 Act), any nominated E&W* address will do.

*- but not elsewhere in UK.

totalproperty
02-08-2009, 20:59 PM
Can a landlord comply with Section 47/48 by including the following within the tenancy agreement:

The Landlord notified the Tenant pursuant to Sections 47 and 48 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 that the address at which notices (including notices in proceedings) may be served upon the Landlord is: 123 Albert Drive, London, SW1 1AB.

jeffrey
02-08-2009, 22:16 PM
Yes, for s.48.
However, s.47 involves providing details on every written demand.

caroline33
03-08-2009, 00:34 AM
Hi, If all rent becomes due when s48 is complied with what happens if Tennant doers a runner, is taken to court denies address given, case thrown out. Now case is simple issue s48 rent due is now due however does the s48 now apply given tenant is no longer the tenant to the property they abadoned and owe arrears on till the point new tenants found?

jeffrey
03-08-2009, 09:28 AM
SorrybutIcannotunderstandyourpost! Please clarify what you are asking.

caroline33
03-08-2009, 13:35 PM
Sorry, can a s48 notice be served on a tenant , thus making all rent due unsuspended if he no longer is a tenant?

jeffrey
03-08-2009, 13:50 PM
If someone (X) still holds a tenancy, whether or not remaining in occupation, X is still liable for rent. L needs to serve s.48 Notice in that case.

There would be no point in L serving such Notice if X is no longer the person obliged to pay rent!

So first determine if X is still liable. If X is an ex-tenant, serve s.48 Notice to be on the safe side- why not?- and this will unsuspend rent due.

caroline33
03-08-2009, 15:12 PM
Thanks Mr Jeffery.

To clarify. X (TENANT) Abandons property, A (Landlord) attempts to mitigate losses and relets property after 3 months. A Sues X for arrears of 3 month owed. Judge says x not liable as no s48 issued.
So if I assume what you are saying is A issue s48 and x (no longer tennant) will now be liable for 3 months areas, am I correct?

jeffrey
03-08-2009, 15:43 PM
Yes. As I told you before, abandoning a property does not end a tenancy. X is liable, come whay may, for rent in respect of at least the period of his tenancy. This period ends for all purposes once L re-lets (and implicitly accepts surrender from X).

caroline33
03-08-2009, 16:15 PM
Thanks for being pateint Mr Jefferry, just one last clarification - yes its possible to serve a section 48 for a amount due even though tenant is no linger technically a tenant anymore?, thanks.