PDA

View Full Version : Notice under s.21(1)(b) or s.21(4)(a) of Housing Act 1988



Rootsey
31-03-2009, 18:02 PM
Hi

i have a tenant that is signed into a 6 month AST. there is one month left to run from the 6th of April. i need to serve notice on them to quit. do i use a S21a as the tenancy will be periodic on the leaving date or S21b as the tenancy is still in it fixed period.

many thanks for you help

jta
31-03-2009, 18:28 PM
Hi

i have a tenant that is signed into a 6 month AST. there is one month left to run from the 6th of April. i need to serve notice on them to quit. do i use a S21a as the tenancy will be periodic on the leaving date or S21b as the tenancy is still in it fixed period.
many thanks for you help
Since you are still in the fixed period you need to serve S21,1,b.

jeffrey
31-03-2009, 18:33 PM
Pedant's note: the references should be to section 21(1)(b) and section 21(4)(a).

jeffrey
31-03-2009, 18:51 PM
Since you are still in the fixed period you need to serve S21,1,b.
Yes [reading it as s.21(1)(b)!] The Notice period is still only two months, even though that will 'stick-out' beyond the expiry date.
A thought: you did protect the deposit, didn't you, Rootsey? If not, s.21 cannot be used.

Rootsey
31-03-2009, 18:52 PM
so just to be clear i would leave both referances to 21 (1)b and 21 (4)a at the top of the notice requiring possession form

jeffrey
31-03-2009, 18:53 PM
so just to be clear i would leave both referances to 21 (1)b and 21 (4)a at the top of the notice requiring possession form
No- as I posted, just s.21(1)(b).

Rootsey
31-03-2009, 19:00 PM
thanks for you help and yes the deposit is nice and secure in the DPS

adib
15-10-2009, 20:25 PM
Hello people

Wanted to find out. I gave a section 21 (4) to my tenant. This was in the fixed term but the notice would expire after the fixed term on reseach of the net I found the following:

There are two different types of notice. It is important to use the right one or a possession action will probably fail. These are the rules:-

Where there is a fixed term and the notice is served on or before the last day of the fixed term, the notice must be given under section 21(1) of the Housing Act 1988.
Where there is a fixed term and the notice is served after the fixed term has expired, the notice must be given under section 21(4) of the 1988 Act.
Where there is no fixed term, the notice is also under section 21(4).
Finding out if I served the correct notice according to the above it seems I have any advice be greatful-thanks

havensRus
15-10-2009, 21:04 PM
If you serve a S21 notice during the fixed term, then it must be served as S21(1)(b). You can serve it up to the last day of the fixed term.

Once the tenancy becomes a Statutory Period Tenancy, after the fixed term has ended, then you would need to serve a S21(4)a.

It would seem you have served the wrong one, if indeed you served it DURING the fixed term.

does that answer your question?

jeffrey
16-10-2009, 11:42 AM
If you serve a S21 notice during the fixed term, then it must be served as S21(1)(b). You can serve it up to the last day of the fixed term.

Once the tenancy becomes a Statutory Period Tenancy, after the fixed term has ended, then you would need to serve a S21(4)a.

It would seem you have served the wrong one, if indeed you served it DURING the fixed term.
Yes. I have re-read s.21(4)(a). It cannot be argued that a Notice under it would be valid if [erroneously] served during the fixed term.
That section applies only to a Notice served during a periodic tenancy, whether contractual or statutory.

spiritkary
06-06-2010, 15:22 PM
Hi guys,

I need to issue a s21 two months notice in the next day or two as T hasn't paid rent for two months and the condition of the house has rapidly declined since T's occupation. I have a fixed term AST that began on 1st February 2010 and expires 31st July 2010. T did not pay a deposit so I haven't needed to protect one.

I do have a Guarantor but I thought I would get the ball rolling first to get T out and then start chasing for rent arrears.

I have been reading this forum and doing research in general and it is my understanding that I will need to serve a section 21(1)(b) Notice even though the two months notice will end after the fixed term has expired. Is it a s21(1)(b)?

I went to collect a blank copy of a s21(1)(b) notice on Friday from my local firm of solicitors to use it and spoke to one of the partners there who does L&T law. He said I should be serving a s21(4)(a) not a s21(1)(b) as the notice will end when the tenancy is in a periodic period. That doesn't sound right to me and now I'm really confused so can any of you clarify this for me please?

Many thanks.

remyrobson
06-06-2010, 16:38 PM
If the T is 2 months in arrears, then you could use a section 8. I'm sure that the experts will be along shortly with more details but in the meantime try reading

http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/agreements.htm

and scroll to 'Serving a valid section 8 notice'
There is also one about section 21 notices.

spiritkary
06-06-2010, 16:53 PM
Thanks for your reply. I appreciate it. I just need an answer regarding the s21 notice really as I want to get it sent off tomorrow.

mind the gap
06-06-2010, 16:59 PM
I think your legal advisor is correct. You need a section 21 (4) (a) as the notice will expire at a date after the end of the fixed term, ie when the tenancy has become statutory periodic. My understanding is that a section 21 (1) (b) is used for notice requiring possession which expires at the end of the fixed term. See this fact sheet:

http://www.letlink.co.uk/letting-factsheets/factsheets/factsheet-21-section-21-notice-requiring-possession-of-an-assured-shorthold-tenancy.html

spiritkary
06-06-2010, 17:56 PM
I interpret it differently to you so that's interesting. IMO s21(1)(b) applies as the Notice is being served during the fixed term of the tenancy.

I have read the source you have referred to and it states that a notice under s21(4)(a) should only be given to a tenant whose tenancy has become a statutory periodic tenancy. My AST hasn't become a statutory periodic tenancy yet until after 31 July 2010.

I have copied the following from Letlink
Under the Housing Act 1988, a landlord who has granted an assured shorthold tenancy has a legal right to get his property back at the end of the tenancy. In order to invoke this right, he is required to follow the correct legal procedure which includes service of a notice (under section 21 of the Housing Act 1988) on his tenant. Section 21 is divided into subsections with different rules applying to notice served during the fixed term of a tenancy and notice for possession that is served during a statutory periodic tenancy.


Fixed Term Tenancies:
Section 21 of the Housing Act 1988 requires that the landlord provides tenants of an Assured Shorthold Tenancy (AST) with a minimum of two months' notice in writing that he/she wants possession of the property. Extra days should be added if the notice is to be sent by post as the two months starts when the tenant receives the notice.

The notice must be served before possession action can be started. In the case of joint landlords the notice can be given by any one of them. Possession under this section cannot take place during the initial six months of the original tenancy. The provisions in section 21(1)(b) apply to fixed term tenancies. They state:

Without prejudice to any right of the landlord under an assured shorthold tenancy to recover possession of the dwelling-house let on the tenancy in accordance with Chapter I above, on or after the coming to an end of an assured shorthold tenancy which was a fixed-term tenancy, a court shall make an order for possession of the dwelling-house if it is satisfied-

a) that the assured shorthold tenancy has come to an end and no further assured tenancy (whether shorthold or not) is for the time being in existence, other than a statutory periodic tenancy: and

b) the landlord, or in the case of joint landlords, at least one of them has given to the tenant not less than two months' notice stating that he requires possession of the dwelling-house.

Notice under this subsection can be served on a tenant [I]at any time during the fixed term of the tenancy (but not before the fixed term begins) provided that the tenant receives a minimum of two months' notice. This is the case even if the two months notice ends after the tenancy agreement has expired.

Bearing in mind the above, surely it should be 21(1)(b)? As you can tell, I am still :confused:

jta
06-06-2010, 18:56 PM
You are right, The 21(1)(b) is used as long as the tenancy is still in the fixed period, the only requirement being that it must allow 2 months notice. the 21(4)(a) is for use when the tenancy is an SPT, it then has to start on a 'rent due' day and finish after the 2 months is up.

Come on MTG, Jeffrey's explained this till he's blue in the face.

mind the gap
06-06-2010, 19:08 PM
You are right, The 21(1)(b) is used as long as the tenancy is still in the fixed period, the only requirement being that it must allow 2 months notice. the 21(4)(a) is for use when the tenancy is an SPT, it then has to start on a 'rent due' day and finish after the 2 months is up.

Come on MTG, Jeffrey's explained this till he's blue in the face.

Yes, I see now. Apologies for confusing everyone. It's the bit which OP has emboldened from the end of the extract from the letlink sheet which explains it.

P.Pilcher
06-06-2010, 20:20 PM
And just to add to the confusion, the housing act does not specify that such a form MUST be used. A county court judge has advised me that he would accept a mere letter giving the tenant the correct amount of notice as fulfilling the requirements. However he did add that he could not guarantee that his colleagues would be of the same opinion!

P.P.

PaulF
06-06-2010, 21:43 PM
And just to add to the confusion, the housing act does not specify that such a form MUST be used. A county court judge has advised me that he would accept a mere letter giving the tenant the correct amount of notice as fulfilling the requirements. However he did add that he could not guarantee that his colleagues would be of the same opinion!What the judge probably meant was that he couldn't guarantee his colleagues had the same knowledge!