View Full Version : Notices to Quit etc.(Prescribed Information) Regs. 1988

23-03-2006, 06:33 AM
Would appreciate guidance from the legal beavers!!!

Here is a link to Statutory Instrument 1988 No 2201 (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1988/Uksi_19882201_en_1.htm)

On their Section 21 Notice Lawpack have a footnote:-

As set out in the Notices to Quit (Prescribed Information) Regulations 1988
1. If the tenant or licensee does not leave the dwelling the landlord or licensor must get an order for possession from the court before the tenant or licensee can be lawfully evicted. The landlord or licensor cannot apply for such an order before the notice to quit or notice to determine has run out (i.e. before the expiry date).
2. A tenant or licensee who does not know if he has any right to remain in possession after a notice to quit or a notice to determine runs out can obtain advice from a solicitor. Help with all or part of the cost of legal advice may be available under the Legal Aid Scheme. He should also be able to obtain information from a Citizens Advice Bureau, a Housing Aid
centre or a Rent Officer.

The Notices to Quit (Prescribed Information) Regulations 1988 mention Section 5 of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 and that section states:-

Part II Notice To Quit
5. Validity of notices to quit
(1) Subject to subsection (1B) below no notice by a landlord or a tenant to quit any premises let (whether before or after the commencement of this Act) as a dwelling shall be valid unless -

(a) it is in writing and contains such information as may be prescribed, and

(b) it is given not less than four weeks before the date on which it is to take effect.

(1A) Subject to subsection (1B) below, no notice by a licensor or a licensee to determine a periodic licence to occupy premises as a dwelling (whether the licence was granted before or after the passing of this Act) shall be valid unless -

(a) it is in writing and contains such information as may be prescribed, and

(b) it is given not less than four weeks before the date on which it is to take effect.

(1B) Nothing in subsection (1) or subsection (1A) above applies to -

(a) premises let on an excluded tenancy which is entered into on or after the date on which the Housing Act 1988 came into force unless it is entered into pursuant to a contract made before that date; or

(b) premises occupied under an excluded licence.

(2) In this section "prescribed" means prescribed by regulations made by the Secretary of State by statutory instrument, and a statutory instrument containing any such regulations shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.

(3) Regulations under this section may make different provision in relation to different descriptions of lettings and different circumstances.

I have not yet traced the prescribed information as the original source document for the Lawpack clause!!

The situation appears to be rather confusing. The Court will be aware of the potential errors of DIY Section 21 Notices. Even if it is not a legal requirement I am sure a Court would favourablly a law stationers form completed correctly and in accordance with the guidance notes of the publisher.

For the relatively small cost I intend to continue my use of suitable pre-printed forms

Additional discussion concerning detail of S21 Notice in Court Papers ..... (http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=13519#post13519)

23-03-2006, 06:41 AM
in here it says notice to quit of 4 weeks? is it

or is it 8 weeks?

please clarify

thank you


23-03-2006, 07:32 AM
You are correct Liberto. In normal practice there is a general minimum period of two months and the notice cannot end earlier than the end of the fixed term.

This thread concerns the background to Regulations mentioned on a notice prepared by law publishers and the details stated as complying with those regulations.

Someone with more wisdom than myself will need to explain the significance of the four week period quoted from the Protection from Eviction Act and the type of tenancies or tenancy agreements to which it applies and what, if any, regulations support this four week period.

Maybe this could be relevant:-

Under the new rules introduced by the Housing Act 1996 an assured shorthold tenancy can be for any length of time. It is perfectly acceptable for a landlord and tenant to agree to set up a tenancy lasting one month. However, should the tenant remain in the property after the duration of the agreement the landlord will then have to give notice under s21 (4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988. The landlord can use the accelerated possession procedure although it should be remembered that the court will not issue an order for possession that takes effect before the initial six month period of an AST.

23-03-2006, 08:39 AM
As I have said before NOTICE TO QUIT does NOT apply to AST's or AT's

A Notice to Quit is served to end a Regulated Tenancy and is usually served when there are rent arrears or the tenant has behaved in such a way that possession is required. You cannot end a Regulated Tenancy by serving either a S8 Notice or a S21 Notice - only by serving a Notice to Quit.

You cannot end an AST or AT by serving a Notice to Quit - it is the wrong form and you will get laughed out of court if you incorrectly serve this form.

The trouble is that a lot of people think they have to serve a tenant Notice to Quit - so they go off looking NTQ up on the internet and find the old regulated tenancy form and they fill that in and print it off - job done! The tenant then either waits the period out before pointing out to the landlord that its the wrong form, or waits until it goes to court.

Note that on S21 the period of waiting for the notice to expire is no less than two months - with a S8 notice, its two weeks.

23-03-2006, 11:47 AM
For the relatively small cost I intend to continue my use of suitable pre-printed forms

There is a selection of clearly labelled forms for download here.


23-03-2006, 13:12 PM
David thanks for your answer.

In your view could reference by Lawpack to the Notice to Quit regulations on a Section 21 be regarded as invalidating the notice because the regulations do not apply?

The Section 21(4)(a) notice from "The Letting Centre" (thanks Energise for the link to the forms) has similar information to the Lawpack one but it is headed "Information for Tenants"

Although David states it is not mandatory to include this information on the notice I am wondering why some authorative sources are doing so and others are not. Again safety wise I think it is better and fairer to include the clauses on a S21 notice rather than leave them out.

23-03-2006, 13:38 PM
In my opinion, the wording Notice to Quit on the S21a form should really be replaced with Notice Seeking Possession because that is what the notice is - people usualy use "Notice to Quit" to loosely describe the notice used to end a tenancy but the law specifies what notice shall apply to each type of tenancy and of course, NTQ was the original notice in use before the AST and ATs came into being.

If you use a properly drafted form such as Oyez,s - you cannot go wrong UNLESS you completely bugger the notice up by putting duff info on it!

23-03-2006, 15:53 PM
very informative

any ideas about my case (see 22-03-2006)

thank you all

23-03-2006, 18:47 PM
Would appreciate guidance from the legal beavers!!!Are you sure they aren't eagles, rather then beavers?!;)

(sorry, can't answer you query as I'm afraid I'm neither a legal beaver nor eagle... although I have to say my wife has occasionally been known to describe me as an 'eager beaver' - but let's not go there....)

23-03-2006, 19:35 PM
Legal eagles or even bald beavers - I'd appreciate help from from anyone :D

Time to look at Liberto's case again...........

23-03-2006, 19:52 PM
Got to agree with DJB here. the S21 notice should be in a prescribed way" notice of seeking pocession etc".The problem here is that the act gives no prescribed direction of the wording.Basiclly this is the "flaw" in S21 notices, its down to the wording.It could be argued that if the notice gives some wording that relates to S21(4)then there shouldn't be a problem but I must admit I have my doubts about this.CCJ's are more concerned about the paperwork being correct but this can have it's pitfalls if a tenant notices that there is something that the judge has overlooked obviously he /she can point this out or appeal as in Macdonald vs Ferdinad(2003).