PDA

View Full Version : Is this a verbal AST?



Snorkerz
31-10-2009, 18:29 PM
Hi, I have a friend who has let a house since 1995 to the same family. There was never a written agreement - is this a verbal AST?

If it is, the N5B form for the s21 procedure requires a copy of the AST - how does he provide a copy of a verbal agreement?

Any advice much appreciated

TIA

tom999
31-10-2009, 18:42 PM
Hi, I have a friend who has let a house since 1995 to the same family. There was never a written agreement - is this a verbal AST?
You may mean an 'oral' agreement. A written agreement is not required to create a tenancy.

The type of agreement would depend on the exact date tenant moved in and what notices had been served, if any.

For example, if the tenant moved in between 15 Jan 1989 and 27 Feb 1997 and landlord didn't issue a valid s.20 notice of the 1988 Act, landlord has created a Standard Assured Tenancy (so cannot use s.21 procedure to gain possession).

If a Standard Assured Tenancy has been created, then serve a valid notice and obtain a court order. Mandatory grounds for possession are more than eight weeks rent owed, using s.8 g8.

In any case, seek specialist legal advice.

Snorkerz
01-11-2009, 09:21 AM
and landlord didn't issue a valid s.20 notice of the 1988 Act, landlord has created a Standard Assured Tenancy (so cannot use s.21 procedure to gain possession).

This seems to be the situation here. Does this mean there is no equivalent to a s21? I ground 1.b seems to be the closest (it is required for the owners occupation) but there was no documentation at all served. Does anyone have any experience on the courts likelyhood to be "of the opinion that it is just and equitable to dispense with the requirement of notice"?

tom999
01-11-2009, 09:30 AM
This seems to be the situation here. Does this mean there is no equivalent to a s21?
If tenancy is an SAT, then the 1988 'Act' applies, and LL can only regain possession on grounds under s.8.

s.21 only applies to AST's as the 1988 Act (http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?ActiveTextDocId=2128271&filesize=13966) states.

Snorkerz
01-11-2009, 09:47 AM
Section 8, ground 1.b seems to be the closest (it is required for the owners occupation) but there was no documentation at all served. Does anyone have any experience on the courts likelyhood to be "of the opinion that it is just and equitable to dispense with the requirement of notice"?

Accepting Tom999s point, can anyone comment on the above?

I'd just like to add my thanks to Tom999 and anyone else who can help. Since joining LZ 6 months ago I have learned so much that I have begun to sound like I know what I'm talking about. This is fine but encourages 'friends' to think of me as the font of all knowledge when it comes to letting :D Of course, anything out of the ordinary and I'm lost. So a big thanks!

westminster
01-11-2009, 11:25 AM
Accepting Tom999s point, can anyone comment on the above?

I'd just like to add my thanks to Tom999 and anyone else who can help. Since joining LZ 6 months ago I have learned so much that I have begun to sound like I know what I'm talking about. This is fine but encourages 'friends' to think of me as the font of all knowledge when it comes to letting :D Of course, anything out of the ordinary and I'm lost. So a big thanks!

To me, it seems perfectly fair to want your house back after 14 years. But IANAL so my interpretation of "just and equitable" in this context is meaningless. Just tell your friends that they need to get legal advice from a specialist, (not any old high street solicitor).

Totally agree about learning so much on this forum.

mind the gap
01-11-2009, 13:25 PM
(not any old high street solicitor).



Nor any young high street solicitor, either for that matter, unless a specialist in LL and T law.

Funny how 'any old' is a pejorative, isn't it?

Yet with some professions it's better to go for an old one if you have the choice. I'd opt for an old GP or an old plumber any time! (But a young dentist - or just any dentist who lives within 50 miles).

Snorkerz - am struggling to imagine you as a hollowed out lump of stone, sloshing with wisdom. Not that you aren't wise :)