PDA

View Full Version : Tenancy Agreement- is it not an AST?



slc1978
01-04-2009, 19:22 PM
Hi All,

I am about to start a new tenancy agreement and wanted to ask a few dumbo questions to make sure it is all ok!

For starters the offer I made was for 1 year lease with a break clause at 6 months, where 2 months notice can be served on or after 4 months.

The contract I have received is titled "Tenancy Agreement" not "Assured Shorthold Tenancy Agreement" (AST) as I have had in the past - are these the same or is there something I should be aware of here?

The break clause is inserted at the end of the contract in a section called "Early Determination", does this sound right?

Thanks in advance!
SLC.

mind the gap
01-04-2009, 19:25 PM
Hi All,

I am about to start a new tenancy agreement and wanted to ask a few dumbo questions to make sure it is all ok!

For starters the offer I made was for 1 year lease with a break clause at 6 months, where 2 months notice can be served on or after 4 months.

The contract I have received is titled "Tenancy Agreement" not "Assured Shorthold Tenancy Agreement" (AST) as I have had in the past - are these the same or is there something I should be aware of here?

The break clause is inserted at the end of the contract in a section called "Early Determination", does this sound right?

Thanks in advance!
SLC.


When you say you have 'received' the agreement, what do you mean? From where (or from whom) did you receive it?

slc1978
01-04-2009, 19:52 PM
Agreement was received from the Letting Agent...

mind the gap
01-04-2009, 20:50 PM
Agreement was received from the Letting Agent...

In that case send it back and tell them to change it so that it says 'Assured Shorthold Tenancy Agreement' on it.

If there are lots more things you don't understand or agree with about it, tell them to get a better one drawn up, preferably in plain English.

Or you could download the RLA one and give it to your solicitor to check to make sure it is fit for purpose.

The rest of the details you mention sound reasonable to me but the lawyers may have a different view.

Preston
01-04-2009, 21:32 PM
Hi All,

I am about to start a new tenancy agreement and wanted to ask a few dumbo questions to make sure it is all ok!

For starters the offer I made was for 1 year lease with a break clause at 6 months, where 2 months notice can be served on or after 4 months.

The contract I have received is titled "Tenancy Agreement" not "Assured Shorthold Tenancy Agreement" (AST) as I have had in the past - are these the same or is there something I should be aware of here?

The break clause is inserted at the end of the contract in a section called "Early Determination", does this sound right?

Thanks in advance!
SLC.

Hi,

are you the landlord or the tenant?

Whether or not the tenancy is an AST will depend upon the circumstances of the letting rather than the heading on the tenancy agreement, but it is best for the agreement to be clear.

Determining a tenancy simply means ending it. So its probably the right heading, but the key is the wording itself.

Might be worth giving a bit more detail on the letting and the agreement to make sure you are getting what you want?

Preston

slc1978
01-04-2009, 22:09 PM
Sorry, I am the tenant.

It simply says on the front of the agreement

Tenancy Agreement
XXXXX
and
YYYYY
(Where X and Y are the landlord and myself respectively.)

Property Address.


The wording on the determination say's:
"The tenant may end the term by giving to the landlord not less than 2 months calendar months notice in writing to the effect such notice not to expire earlier than DAY MONTH YEAR and upon expiry of such notice the tenant shall give the landlord vacant possession of the property and the term shall end."

There is a similar clause for the landlord but mentions this notice to be served by way of a section 21.

I assume that all looks aceptable?

mind the gap
02-04-2009, 09:05 AM
Apologies, I have probably confused you here. I was assuming you were the LL. (Not sure why!) Preston's answer will make much more sense, in that case.

jeffrey
02-04-2009, 10:27 AM
If L is not granting an AST, he might be granting:
a. an SAT (still within the 1988 Act but L cannot use s.21 procedure); or
b. a non-Act tenancy ("common-law contractual"), perhaps because Schedule 1 to the Act bars the Act from applying.

slc1978
02-04-2009, 12:40 PM
As a tentant, should I insist in an AST? does it matter?

jeffrey
02-04-2009, 13:44 PM
As a tenant, should I insist in an AST? does it matter?
You cannot insist on something that is impossible [e.g. because of Schedule 1].

slc1978
02-04-2009, 13:48 PM
Sorry Jeffrey, I don't understand - what is schedule 1? :)

jeffrey
02-04-2009, 13:53 PM
Sorry Jeffrey, I don't understand - what is schedule 1?
It's this:


If L is not granting an AST, he might be granting:
a. an SAT (still within the 1988 Act but L cannot use s.21 procedure); or
b. a non-Act tenancy ("common-law contractual"), perhaps because Schedule 1 to the Act bars the Act from applying.
So read the Housing Act 1988's Schedule 1 here: http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/Home.aspx.
The most commonly-encountered paragraph is the 'rent > £25 000 p.a.'