PDA

View Full Version : Can you serve a section 21 at the start of a tenancy



Mark1564
26-03-2010, 07:29 AM
Hi,

I am having problems removing tenants after the expiry of an AST. I am learning fast and in the process of section 21 etc. what I would like to know is, firstly am I correct in thinking that it seems that any tenant can reside beyond the tenancy agreement and force us LL into posession orders. thats whether you use a letting agent or do it yourself.

secondly from reading the notes on this website about section21 notices, can a LL issue a section21 notice at the time of the issue of the tenancy agreement and after the deposit is taken as a precaution? So when I find new tenants and provide a new 6 month AST can I also attach a sect 21 to coincide with the last date of the tenancy this way If they do decide to stay I can begin proceedings on the last day of the tenancy agreement?

Mars Mug
26-03-2010, 07:37 AM
Basically the answer is yes, but it must be done properly. Search this forum for ‘Sword Of Damocles’ and look for threads with recent posts in them, so that you get the latest opinion.

Mark1564
26-03-2010, 07:51 AM
Thanks Mars Meg,

I read that and it seems that issuing a section 21 at the time the tenancy starts is a good insurance policy. You dont have to use it but its available so my question is why arent all letting agents doing this to protect their landlords and why arent all LLs doing this to protect themselves after all its just a piece of paper downloaded from this web site that has to be filled in correctly. sent with an attchment letter to your new tenants explaining what it is seems like an excellent idea to me.

Further into that thread, it stated that a tenant has to give one months notice during the fixed term. I understand that to be courtesy only and they can leave on the the last day without informing you.

tom999
26-03-2010, 07:56 AM
I read that and it seems that issuing a section 21 at the time the tenancy starts is a good insurance policy. You dont have to use it but its available so my question is why arent all letting agents doing this to protect their landlords and why arent all LLs doing this to protect themselves after all its just a piece of paper downloaded from this web site that has to be filled in correctly. sent with an attchment letter to your new tenants explaining what it is seems like an excellent idea to me.It could be used to reduce risk in specific cases, e.g. HB tenants, but some may consider it as not a very good welcome for new tenants, under normal circumstances.

Mars Mug
26-03-2010, 08:09 AM
Further into that thread, it stated that a tenant has to give one months notice during the fixed term. I understand that to be courtesy only and they can leave on the the last day without informing you.

My personal opinion is that courtesy should be a two way thing. If I was a tenant presented with an S21 at the earliest opportunity then I would know that this gives the landlord the ability to get me out at very short notice after the end of the fixed term. So with that in mind if I was renting for six months while moving house, something I was recently planning, I would not be particularly keen at say month 5 of the tenancy to inform anyone of my plans, knowing that it would lead to viewing during the last few weeks of a tenancy at a time when I would be planning a move. I would not feel that I owed the landlord any notice if they have already suggested that they want me out. And the phrases like “It’s only for insurance purposes and if you are a good tenant will not apply” given verbally by a LA would not work for me.

Since the S21 cannot be effective in the first 6 months you should be able to assess the situation with the tenant in the first 3-4 months and if you feel the need then issue the S21 at that point, though some tenants see an S21 as a signal to stop paying rent. But if you are issuing an S21 at that stage I would assume that things have already gone bad.

Ericthelobster
26-03-2010, 08:13 AM
I read that and it seems that issuing a section 21 at the time the tenancy starts is a good insurance policy. You dont have to use it but its available so my question is why arent all letting agents doing this to protect their landlords and why arent all LLs doing this to protect themselvesFirstly, you seem to have an objective of wanting to find tenants for 6 months blocks of time and then get rid of them for some reason. Personally, I want my tenants to stay as long as possible (providing they're good ones, of course) as it maximises my income and minimises my hassle. To that end, I don't issue 'precautionary' S21s at the outset as it's likely to make the tenant uneasy and more likely to want to move on.

Furthermore, it's for the most part a bit pointless. If I were to decide for whatever reason I did want a tenant to leave after the end of the first 6 months, then I can issue the S21 at any time within the first 4 months and not be disadvantaged at all versus your strategy. That's normally long enough to know you haven't taken on a disastrous tenant; I think it's unlikely that something fundamental will happen between 4 and 6 months to make me regret that decision.

Finally - in any case where I have needed to end a tenancy, it's been because of breach of the tenancy conditions, ie failure to pay rent, and I have used S8 instead - which I'd have done regardless of whether I had a valid S21 in place (although I issued them too as a back-up), as it's a quicker process.

Poppy35
26-03-2010, 08:16 AM
plus how can you give them the S21 before the deposit is protected?

Lawcruncher
26-03-2010, 09:20 AM
plus how can you give them the S21 before the deposit is protected?

Quite.

And apart from that you cannot give notice until the tenancy has started and it will not start until the tenant goes into occupation. So, handing the tenant a section 21 notice when he signs up will mean the notice is invalid. As has been said, there is no hurry.

tom999
26-03-2010, 11:37 AM
This thread: When your S.21 might be invalid (http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=24231), discussed this topic in greater detail. There was no satisfactory answer as to whether the law recognises tenancies of part of a day - which may affect the validity of the same day service of a s.21 as an AST.

Mark1564
26-03-2010, 14:45 PM
interesting comments. I can see the points raised about scaring off tenants, but a tenant at any time like mine could go seperate ways or loose their job and inform you at the very end of the tenancy fixed term then you can only give them notice from there which would give you 2 months from the end of the fixed term then 3 to 6 weeks to get them out. If you issue a section 21 2 months before the end as a precaution well explained then you would only loose a months rent after the fixed term whilst you try and get them out instead of 3 months.

Snorkerz
26-03-2010, 16:47 PM
3 to 6 weeks.Optimistic: If you commence your s21 proceedings on the day after the fixed term ends, you will have 4/6 weeks wait for a court decision, minimum 14 days given to tenant to leave, and then possibly 2/4 weeks to arrange court bailiffs.

I believe you can commence your proceedings before the end of the fixed term, and as I understand it, the judge can give a possession date at the end of the fixed term - thus leaving only the 'bailiff' time to worry about. To achieve this, I am guessing you would need to start the whole process around month 2/3 of a 6 month term - by when you will have an idea if your tenants are 'decent' and it still has to be better than saying "welcome to your new home - this is your notice to leave".

rebecca.483
26-03-2010, 17:25 PM
I've just moved in to a new rental and I was given a S21 I only noticed as I was going through all the paperwork at home I feel its a bit sneaky and when I questioned LA was told it was a precaution and every one of their lettings has them but it still makes me feel like they think bad of me (sorry can't think of a more eloquent way to put it) and although LA and LL say they want a long let it puts me on edge, they never mentioned they would be issuing S21 before paying for all referencing etc.

Mars Mug
26-03-2010, 18:59 PM
1. I feel its a bit sneaky

2. and when I questioned LA was told it was a precaution and every one of their lettings has them but it still makes me feel like they think bad of me (sorry can't think of a more eloquent way to put it) and


3. although LA and LL say they want a long let it puts me on edge, they never mentioned they would be issuing S21 before paying for all referencing etc.

1. So you don’t consider it to be a ‘courteous’ action? If you look up other threads relating to ‘Sword Of Damocles’ you might see that some people who issue the S21 this way still expect you to ‘courteously’ give notice if you want to leave at the end of the fixed term (which I guess in your case you don’t).

2. They would say that wouldn’t they (but not in print)? But did they tell you what they would consider a problem? Did they tell you that if you complain about problems or become a bit of a pain you might be out quicker than expected? My opinion is that it can give them a power of short notice that they really should not have.

3. If you find by looking through these threads that the S21 has been invalidly issued, I advise you not to inform them, leave them oblivious to the fact but keep good records yourself.

I do hope that both your LL and LA are good people and you are very happy with your tenancy, but it’s hardly a welcoming start is it?

Mark1564
26-03-2010, 19:30 PM
I take on board everyones points. I have good tenants. with 6 weeks to go till the end they inform they are splitting up. I say Ok the tenancy ends in 1 month I wont renew it and start the process looking for someone else. I find someone, tell them they can have the house they tell their landlord to re-rent their house. Everything hunky dorey. Now I have one month to go. Mr T is leaving Mrs T has seeked council advise and they have told her to stay put and force me to evict her. Noe I have to give 2 months notice from next rent day this now takes her till 31st May, 14 days for posession 3-6 weeks for baliff. neww tenants now homeless, myself likely to pay two months mortgage whilst she lives there for free. which part of them are good tenants now? why should LL be courteous? surely its about covering our arses. There as far as I can see no other way to protect your investment. Surely all landlords should be sending a section 21 at the 4 month point of a 6 month AST with a letter explaining what it is and why you have done it. otherwise they could turn round on the last day of the fixed term and say I am now unemployed Im staying and I cant pay you rent from then on its 3 months of no rent isny it?

Mars Mug
26-03-2010, 19:45 PM
I know you’ve had a bad time, many landlords who post here have similar or worse stories as do many tenants. But, as was said above, you would be no worse off if you issued the S21 3-4 months into the tenancy, and there’s less risk of it being issued with the errors of timing that the very early S21 can create.

Snorkerz
26-03-2010, 19:55 PM
Mark, I think many people on here will feel for you.

I think one has to regard this as a business decision. When you get your next lot of tenants, you need to assess them carefully - credit referencing, appropriate deposit, guarantors if necessary. You might want to take out insurance to protect your rent - these policies usually include cover for legal fees to evict tenants too.

If this involves extra cost, you factor this into the rent - in the same way as you need to factor a certain amount of empty periods into any income business plan.

None of this would guarantee a trouble free future - no business is guaranteed trouble-free - but it can minimise the risks and effects.

As an aside, my 1st ever tenants left owing 2 months rent and having caused at least as much damage - benefits claimants, no guarantor, tiny deposit. I was stuffed! So, I'm not saying I'd have handled things any different or better than you - just I have learned, and these are some of the lessons. My current tenants don't have an s21 hanging over them though ;)

rebecca.483
26-03-2010, 21:25 PM
Mars Mug those are my sentiments exactly.
I did a search of Sword Of Damocles and found lots of interesting info but has still left me a bit confused I wonder what your take would be on situation...
if you handed deposit and first months rent etc over at same time as signed tenancy and got keys and was given section 21 they registered online same day deposit, but surely if they stapled the receipt for deposit to section 21 this is obivous that the deposit could not have been protected at the time it was served?

Lawcruncher
26-03-2010, 22:03 PM
I wonder what your take would be on situation...
if you handed deposit and first months rent etc over at same time as signed tenancy and got keys and was given section 21 they registered online same day deposit, but surely if they stapled the receipt for deposit to section 21 this is obivous that the deposit could not have been protected at the time it was served?

I refer to the reply I gave earlier:


...you cannot give notice until the tenancy has started and it will not start until the tenant goes into occupation. So, handing the tenant a section 21 notice when he signs up will mean the notice is invalid.

Mars Mug
26-03-2010, 22:04 PM
I’m not really qualified to answer that, there are a lot of others on this forum who are much sharper on the details of serving the S21 than I am. Excellent timing Lawcruncher :)

rebecca.483
27-03-2010, 00:26 AM
so tenancy started that same day does that mean occupancy has started? or will it not start until I enter the house and "go into occupation"?
I couldn't work out what was what in my case from reading views in http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=24231&highlight=section+invalid
Many Thanks

Mark1564
27-03-2010, 06:30 AM
Thanks everyone for all your comments. It has been very interesting chatting about this. I think a section 21 with a well worded explanation 4 months into a 6 month AST might be the way to do it and also insurance cover is a way to go, so if anyone uses any who is good I would like to know. I use simple landlords and they dont cover this situation. typical

Ericthelobster
27-03-2010, 09:54 AM
Thanks everyone for all your comments. It has been very interesting chatting about this. I think a section 21 with a well worded explanation 4 months into a 6 month AST might be the way to do it Have to say I think that would be much, much worse than issuing it at the start of the tenancy.

I think maybe at the start of your relationship, a new tenant might just about find it acceptable to be given a 'precautionary' S21 at the outset of the tenancy, but after they've been in residence for 4 months as good tenants paying their rent on time, how do you think they are going to feel when served a document saying they need to leave in 2 months time ('but don't worry I don't really mean it')?

Incidentally there has been discussion here in the past about the possibility of invalidating an S21 by serving it without 'meaning' it - ie, telling the tenant that you have no intention of acting upon it; don't worry, you'll be able to stay as long a you want, etc

mjbfire
27-03-2010, 09:59 AM
Mark,

I started a thread similar to this a month ago, and had similar replies,

And came to the following conclusion.

That what every your long term plans for your P, when you sign a 6 month contract in law you are entering an agreement for 6 months, so why not cover yourself by serving an early s21. As explained earlier the court process would still give them over a month to find a place. But it doesn't stop you and the T coming to an agreement, which is always nicer than going to court.

The trouble about serving it when trouble occur is that the situation must be pretty bad, but not bad enough for s8, but as soon as you do, they could stop paying rent, trashing the place, and start becoming a pain, not letting viewings, so why wouldn't you want to go to court as soon as possible.

The procedure I use.

Do a draft inventory on day 1(Signed and dated as normal), protect the deposit online (As funds should have cleared prior to tenant moving in), leave it with the T for a week, to pick up any minor points (Lights, Locks ets)
Then go back a week later to do the final inventory (Signed and as normal)

This allows you the opportunity to see, what kind of tenants they are as they should have unpacked by then and give them the deposit details and also to legally serve them with the S21 and out any minor problems or put them on the inventory.

And by the time the fixed term is up, they have forgotten about it, or if they are still worried about it, sign another fixed term after 6 months and start over again.

In Summary

Also if they are good tenants why would you follow though with the s21, as would cost you money and time, and if they are a pain why wouldn't you want to get the P back as soon.

So only bad T have anything to fear!!!!

Mars Mug
27-03-2010, 10:31 AM
Also if they are good tenants why would you follow though with the s21, as would cost you money and time, and if they are a pain why wouldn't you want to get the P back as soon.

So only bad T have anything to fear!!!!

If I was a tenant I would be a good tenant, but would have a pretty good understanding of how the S21 could work in the landlords favour to shrink the normal 2 months notice that a tenant might expect.

I also know that other than bad tenants there are also bad landlords and letting agents, plenty of examples on this forum lately, so I would know that as a good tenant I would be in a poor position with a landlord who holds an S21 over my head.

Other threads have suggested that a tenant may have as little as two weeks after receiving the notification that the landlord intends to regain possession before court action starts with possible costs placed on the tenant. That notification could arrive as soon as the fixed term ends. What protection is there for a good tenant in that situation? Why should I as a good tenant not be concerned on the day I see an S21 handed to me with the words (not written down) “don’t worry, if you’re a good tenant it won’t be used – trust me”?

mjbfire
27-03-2010, 11:30 AM
I comes down to a few reasons.

1) If you are a good T, why would the LL go though the hassle in getting a new T.

2) The timing is actually better, as a LL you are in no rush, and that you can prove you served the s21.

3) When you rent out the P, even if you do all the checks, you are still trusting the T, to be a good T as is the T trusting you to be a good LL.

4) As per most of the questions on this forum, is about s8, s21 and deposits.
If you issue an early s21, most of the questions are illrellavant, as you mite not need a s8 as it be as quick as a s21 route, and the deposit has to be protected.

5) As with my one problem tennant, he/she? only came a problem, because i didn't want to put him/her? out on the street. But in hindsight I wish I had the option, but doubt would have excised it, as he/she? wasn't a bad tennant until he/she didn't want to pay the last 8 weeks rent, due to having no money after buying a house and his/her? lawyer told him we could go for more under "Distress Of Rent", as he had gave notice 12 weeks ealier, but his house purchase got delayed. So trumped up bearch or QE, haressment, Illegal eviction and unlawfull rent increase charges, even through everything we did was in writting, and I guess his lawyer was going say in court(Paid by Legal Aid or pressure groups) we did all of the above due to his/her? outlook in life.

But in my view it comes done to the old phrase.

Hope for the best, plan for the worst, as LL once the T has moved in you have very few rights other than S8/S13/S21 all which can be challanged by a third party(Court, RAC), and the T has many. So tipping the scales a very little bit back, is not a bad thing.

Mars Mug
27-03-2010, 12:01 PM
I can understand why many landlords do this, and when reading about the plights of good landlords who have been stung by bad tenants I am sympathetic, but there are two sides to this. I don’t believe the S21 was ever intended to be used in this way to reduce a tenants notice rights and because of the way it can be abused there will be changes ahead, take a look at the Rugg Review which mentions problems with the S21 process;

http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/chp/Projects/PRSreview.htm

Ericthelobster
27-03-2010, 12:51 PM
1) If you are a good T, why would the LL go though the hassle in getting a new T.Plenty of good Ts have been on this forum complaining about being moved on through absolutely no wrong-doing of their own; normally because the LL has decided to sell up. It's a pretty common situation, especially with so-called 'accidental' landlords - ie those who end up letting out their own home as the circumstances are temporarily not right for them to sell.

The idea of an LL, having served an S21 at the start of the tenancy, being effectively able skip the 2 months notice and immediately apply to the courts for a possession order, is pretty rubbish in my view.

mjbfire
27-03-2010, 14:05 PM
I can see what eric is saying,

How many LL are out there not doing inventories, contracts, not protecting deposits, not doing gas electrial and gas checks or EPCs. Maybe not bad people but maybe not being as professional and business like as they should be.

All I am trying to say is, us as LL should be professional and business like to protect our investments, which could be at least £100,000 and the days of leases on the back of fag packets are gone.

But in the case of accidental LL, hopefully the LL be honest enough to let the incoming tennant know and I think buyers coming to view mite give the game away. And also I guess you would serve them with a S8(G1 i think) before the Tennacy starts and S21 after to ensure you get the properity back quickly.

But T nowdays think a T Home is their castle, and not afraid to use the law or the threat of the law to get their way, so I can't see what wrong about being careful.

Snorkerz
27-03-2010, 21:06 PM
But T nowdays think a T Home is their castle, and not afraid to use the law or the threat of the law to get their way, so I can't see what wrong about being careful.Why should it be any other way?

The issue with an early s21 is that although it falls within the wording of the law - and is therefore perfectly legal - its use in this manner circumvents the tenants rights, and this is why it's days in it's current form are surely numbered.

Mars Mug
27-03-2010, 21:54 PM
The Rugg Review (I gave a link above) discusses the S21 in a number of places and in particular it’s ‘retaliatory’ use by some landlords. It’s actually referring to the way some landlords will issue an S21 in response to a tenant simply complaining about issues with the property. The Rugg Review does not even mention the use of the ‘early’ S21 which in my opinion can be far worse for the tenant.

Here’s a few quotes from the review (that really should be read in context). My view is that those landlords who use the S21 in the way discussed here will eventually pay the price when the law is changed to prevent those methods, and they will be here on this forum when that happens complaining that the law is biased towards the tenant.

"Discussion is currently underway as to whether change should take place to the current legislation on tenure. For example, lobbyists have highlighted the instance of what is termed ‘retaliatory eviction’ which entails landlords giving tenants notice to quit if they complain about property condition. Changes are sought to s21 of the Housing Act 1988 so that landlords could be challenged if retaliatory eviction is suspected."

"Tenants right groups argue that there are two ways to deal with the incidence of retaliatory eviction. First, it should be possible for tenants to take the eviction notice to a property tribunal, so that a judgement could be made about whether the eviction notice has been served in response to the tenant trying to exercise their statutory rights. Second, it should be the case that s21 notices could only be available to landlords who pass some sort of management quality test, perhaps by being a member of an accreditation scheme. Crew (2007) indicates that measures are in place in other countries to deal with the incidence of eviction where a tenant has complained,"

"To this end, it could be argued that changing s21 constitutes a response to a symptom rather than a cause of problems. It might be more appropriate to aim to remove from the PRS those landlords who would rather evict a tenant than deal with necessary repair."

mind the gap
27-03-2010, 22:11 PM
But T nowdays think a T Home is their castle...

A T's home should surely be his castle...as much as anyone else's is theirs?

Mr_H
29-03-2010, 19:45 PM
Hi mjbfire. I read with interest to a thread you wrote particularly with the section where you write “the procedure I use”. I recently have added a thread asking for some advice/tips on becoming a landlord. http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=27239 /

Am I correct in saying you do the following:

1. Once you have found a tenant you obtain a deposit prior to tenant moving in and place the deposit into a DPS? At the same time do you have the AST agreement signed between you and the tenant? If so, how long then do you allow the tenant to move in? Next day, a week later?
2. Tenant moves in and meet tenant to go through a draft inventory.
3. Return in a week to do a final inventory. I like the point you raised as this gives you an idea what the tenant is like. I assume you have to agree that you will be returning and just can’t let yourself in? Have you had any incidents where tenant has refused to let you in to do the final inventory?
All being well you then serve the Sec 21. Have you have any incidents where they refuse to sign this? What happens then? What is your unique selling point to make tenant feel at ease when issuing the Sec 21?

Many thanks

(an anxious soon to be landlord)

Mr_H
29-03-2010, 19:48 PM
Hi mjbfire. I read with interest to a thread you wrote particularly with the section where you write “the procedure I use”. I recently have added a thread asking for some advice/tips on becoming a landlord. http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums...ad.php?t=27239 /

Am I correct in saying you do the following:

1. Once you have found a tenant you obtain a deposit prior to tenant moving in and place the deposit into a DPS? At the same time do you have the AST agreement signed between you and the tenant? If so, how long then do you allow the tenant to move in? Next day, a week later?
2. Tenant moves in and meet tenant to go through a draft inventory.
3. Return in a week to do a final inventory. I like the point you raised as this gives you an idea what the tenant is like. I assume you have to agree that you will be returning and just can’t let yourself in? Have you had any incidents where tenant has refused to let you in to do the final inventory?
All being well you then serve the Sec 21. Have you have any incidents where they refuse to sign this? What happens then? What is your unique selling point to make tenant feel at ease when issuing the Sec 21?

Many thanks

(an anxious soon to be landlord)

Mars Mug
29-03-2010, 20:00 PM
The tenant doesn’t need to sign an S21.

Just add a covering note that explains that the S21 is simply for insurance purposes and that if the tenant doesn’t cause any problems it will not be used.

On second thoughts don’t add a note because that would be too truthful and could possibly be used to invalidate the S21 in court.

Keep it all verbal, make sure there’s no tape recorders, or just be very careful about what you say.

I’m not quite sure how you sweeten the notice that you want the tenant out in six months time, but it probably includes the words “trust me, I’m an honest landlord”.

Don’t take me too seriously, just feeling a bit sarcastic. ;)

Mr_H
29-03-2010, 20:09 PM
Thanks for the tip. As there is no need for the tenant to sign a Sec 21, what proof do you have that one was actually given and can a tenant at any point down the line also say they never received one? What happens then?

Mars Mug
29-03-2010, 20:13 PM
Thanks for the tip. As there is no need for the tenant to sign a Sec 21, what proof do you have that one was actually given and can a tenant at any point down the line also say they never received one? What happens then?

I think the normal method is proof of postage. If you can get the tenant to sign/date it then fine, but a tenant isn't required to sign it for it to be valid.

This might help;

http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=26437&highlight=serving

Though personally I've never used these types of postal service so don't know how it's recorded what has actually been posted, could be a menu for the local Chinese for example?

mind the gap
29-03-2010, 21:10 PM
Though personally I've never used these types of postal service so don't know how it's recorded what has actually been posted, could be a menu for the local Chinese for example?
Nah. They just stick those in their thousands through the door minus envelopes (along with all the pizza delivery, curry house, dry-cleaning, carpet-cleaning, roof-mending & nightclubbing ones). Then, depending on how houseproud (or otherwise) the tenants are, it (the junk mail) builds up into a massive pile behind the door which only gets cleared when it physically obstructs the door to the point where the Ts have to climb in through the window to get in.

Don't worry, Mr H, our tenants are students.

Mars Mug
29-03-2010, 21:13 PM
MTG, do you know if proof of posting actually provides proof of what was posted?

mind the gap
29-03-2010, 21:28 PM
MTG, do you know if proof of posting actually provides proof of what was posted?

I suppose that it does not provide forensic evidence of what was in the envelope, but I have been given to understand that two separate copies posted from difference offices or from same office on different days with proofs of postage will satisfy a judge.

The outcome of any hearing would hinge on LL having made all reasonable effort to serve, rather than proof absolute that T had received the documents (as it is so easy for T to refuse them/deny having been served if presented with them in person, them I guess).

Mars Mug
29-03-2010, 21:32 PM
OK, I don’t doubt what you say since it’s been posted on this forum numerous times, but I just wondered earlier what is to stop a landlord posting a blank sheet of paper and keeping the proof of postage? Why does that prove that an S21 was posted?

mind the gap
29-03-2010, 21:41 PM
OK, I don’t doubt what you say since it’s been posted on this forum numerous times, but I just wondered earlier what is to stop a landlord posting a blank sheet of paper and keeping the proof of postage? Why does that prove that an S21 was posted?

Ummm.

(a) The tenant would have good reason to doubt the LL's sanity
(b) What would be the point? If the LL is going to go to the trouble of posting a blank sheet of paper and collecting proof of postage of said activity, he might as well send a s21 instead. Publish and be damned! :)

Mars Mug
29-03-2010, 22:23 PM
(a) The tenant would have good reason to doubt the LL's sanity
(b) What would be the point? If the LL is going to go to the trouble of posting a blank sheet of paper and collecting proof of postage of said activity, he might as well send a s21 instead. Publish and be damned! :)

(a) The tenant receives a blank piece of paper in the post but doesn't know who from (But is the receiver aware of the proof of postage?)
(b) If this really is a way to say you posted an S21 without actually posting an S21 (which I can’t believe it is), then it might suit a lot of landlords to be able to say they served an S21 when in fact they did not.

Ericthelobster
29-03-2010, 22:41 PM
The tenant receives a blank piece of paper in the post but doesn't know who from (But is the receiver aware of the proof of postage?)No, the receiver is unaware.


If this really is a way to say you posted an S21 without actually posting an S21 (which I can’t believe it is), then it might suit a lot of landlords to be able to say they served an S21 when in fact they did not.But in what possible circumstances could or would that happen? I really can't come up with any reason why an LL would post a blank sheet rather than a valid S21; likewise why would a judge would ever believe a tenant who claimed that's what they had been sent rather than what the LL said (ie, the valid S21).

mind the gap
29-03-2010, 22:42 PM
[
(b) If this really is a way to say you posted an S21 without actually posting an S21 (which I can’t believe it is), then it might suit a lot of landlords to be able to say they served an S21 when in fact they did not.
I am probably being dim, but I honestly cannot see the point. Why would anyone want to make provision in advance to be able to claim they sent a notice but not want to have actually sent it, but to have sent a blank sheet instead? Why would it 'suit them' to do so?

Mars Mug
29-03-2010, 22:55 PM
Ok, your tenant is 3 months into their fixed term and are being an absolute pain, so you decide you want them out as quickly as possible using the S21 route. You know that you can serve the S21 early at say 4 months and start the process proper at the 6 month limit. But if you serve that S21 at 4 months you may not see any more rent, so you post that blank sheet of paper (or some other official looking form) to pick up your proof of postage, and the tenant is none the wiser, until that six month period is over and they receive the notification that the landlord has started proceedings to regain possession.

mind the gap
29-03-2010, 22:58 PM
Ok, your tenant is 3 months into their fixed term and are being an absolute pain, so you decide you want them out as quickly as possible using the S21 route. So you know that you can serve the S21 early at say 4 months and start the process proper at the 6 month limit. But if you serve that S21 at 4 months you may not see any more rent, so you post that blank sheet of paper (or some other official looking form) to pick up your proof of postage, and the tenant is none the wiser, until that six month period is over and they receive the notification that the landlord has started proceedings to regain possession.


Aha. That's a bit Machiavellian for me. I do however suspect that T might just put two and two together if you start sending prospective Ts round to view the property in month 5 and stop paying rent anyway.

There is also the problem that any LL who carried out this fiendish plan would then have to lie in court about it. Perjury? Fraud?

Mars Mug
30-03-2010, 06:08 AM
1. Aha. That's a bit Machiavellian for me. I do however suspect that T might just put two and two together if you start sending prospective Ts round to view the property in month 5 and stop paying rent anyway.


2. There is also the problem that any LL who carried out this fiendish plan would then have to lie in court about it. Perjury? Fraud?


I agree, but if it’s a problem tenant then the landlord might think it’s better to delay viewings until the tenant is out of the way. Does anyone who serves an early S21 at the start of a tenancy send round people for viewings at months 4/5 when the situation has gone bad?
If it does come down to honesty in court and the postal certificate is not solid evidence then I assume this is a case where you are not required to prove posting but are just supplying information which helps to remove doubt over whether or not the S21 was served. And we all know that landlords are totally honest and decent people who are incapable of lying in court.

1.But in what possible circumstances could or would that happen? I really can't come up with any reason why an LL would post a blank sheet rather than a valid S21;
2.likewise why would a judge would ever believe a tenant who claimed that's what they had been sent rather than what the LL said (ie, the valid S21).

Sorry, missed your post, earlier;


Please see my reply above (post #45).
The tenant receives a blank piece of paper in the post (or the menu for a Chinese restaurant) and chucks it in the bin, they have no reason to hang on to it and are not likely to be presenting it in court a few months later.

mjbfire
30-03-2010, 12:27 PM
I didn't know this thread is still going on.

Answer to Mr H.

As per the AST,

1) EPC, Gas Checks, Electric checks(Duty of Care Stuff), fire alarms etc
2) Meet people outside P and check name/address is the same as when made viewing appointment especially if there a current T in P( Your security as well as T).
3) Show people around if empty or with current T agreement.
4) Check whether you creating a HMO(L) amd whether you want to manage one.
5) Holding Deposit with explaination of when and what not returnable.
6) Credit and Referance checks.
7) Draft AST a few days before hand(So no changes on move in day) and then take the deposit and first month rent (If cash can be done on move in day, but all funds must be cleared by move in day)
8) Move in day sign AST contract, standing order form and Draft inventory with date agreed to return(Can't see the point of inspections without the T being there).
Protect Deposit Online
9) Final Inventory, take deposit details and S21.

No one has ever said don't come back for Final inventory, as it actually in their benefit as a P never gets better with age and they get minor problems sorted.
Don't forget it's only a notice not an agreement, so they don't need to sign it, but if they do they can't agrue about getting it.
But if you want to go all MI5 as Mrs Mugs, you could take a photo or get them to sign the final inventory on top of it. But I think its a bit over the top.
If they don't want to sign it, you can always send it by registered post.

Problem T are like robbers, you can't stop them trying to rob you, if they really want to, but if you make it as hard as you can for them at the start to do bad things, then they will move onto easier, less informed LL.

Mars Mug
30-03-2010, 12:53 PM
But if you want to go all MI5 as Mrs Mugs, you could take a photo or get them to sign the final inventory on top of it. But I think its a bit over the top.

Many things seem over the top until you lose a court case on a technicality.

There’s nothing ‘MI5’ about what I have been discussing, it’s simply that common advice on this forum where an S21 is posted is to post two separate copies and get a free postal certificate. But my simple point is that I don’t see how a postal certificate verifies what was actually posted, and I simply wanted to understand why judges seem to be happy to accept it as proof. You mentioned a face to face handing over of the S21, but not everyone does that.

Lawcruncher
30-03-2010, 16:18 PM
The system of serving notices is clearly open to abuse. The system (more or less) evolved in the days when notices would be served by professionals such as solicitors and surveyors. There was a presumption that no professional (especially a solicitor who risked being struck off) would fabricate the service of a notice.

Snorkerz
30-03-2010, 18:23 PM
The service of s8 & s21 notices may also be governed by the level of proof required in civil cases - ie the judge has to decide which version of events is the most likely. A tenant who can prove that their landlord has been 'dodgy' in other respects may well be believed when they claim they have never seen document 'X' over a shifty landlord in a shiny suit. (mind you, a shiny suit might be better than no suit at all -eurgh!).

However, a landlord who has dotted all the 'i's and crossed all the 't's is likely to be believed over a tenant who attends court in knuckledusters with a Doberman in the pay & display next door.

mind the gap
30-03-2010, 18:26 PM
However, a landlord who has dotted all the 'i's and crossed all the 't's is likely to be believed over a tenant who attends court in knuckledusters with a Doberman in the pay & display next door.

...with the remains of a traffic warden between its jaws!

Snorkerz
30-03-2010, 18:33 PM
...with the remains of a traffic warden between its jaws!

Now Now MTG - no humour or we'll be carted off to T.A.B. (fancy Lasagne? - I'll take all the meat out!)

mind the gap
30-03-2010, 19:09 PM
Now Now MTG - no humour or we'll be carted off to T.A.B. (fancy Lasagne? - I'll take all the meat out!)

Jest not. I was once offered a vegetarian 'pizza to take out' in Athens which was exactly that - a meat pizza with the meat taken out. They just didn't get it!

Snorkerz
30-03-2010, 19:38 PM
As you know, I once worked on Railway Catering - we used to joke that the Bacon & Tomato rolls were suitable for vegetarians because there was so little meat in them!

Mars Mug
30-03-2010, 20:18 PM
I nearly burned my face off eating a British Rail burger on a train in the early days of them having microwaves. I think the thing had been in there for several minutes and the outside of the burger had sealed causing it to ball up with super hot fat inside. I kept to the bacon and tomato ‘flavour’ rolls after that, and they weren’t bad at all.

mind the gap
30-03-2010, 20:29 PM
I nearly burned my face off eating a British Rail burger on a train in the early days of them having microwaves. I think the thing had been in there for several minutes and the outside of the burger had sealed causing it to ball up with super hot fat inside. I kept to the bacon and tomato ‘flavour’ rolls after that, and they weren’t bad at all.

My dad returned a (just-purchased) British Rail egg sandwich with mould inside, only to be refused a refund because 'You chose it, sir'.

(Don't worry, Snorkerz, it was an aggressive mountain of a woman who rebuked him thus - not you! :D)

Snorkerz
30-03-2010, 21:10 PM
My dad returned a (just-purchased) British Rail egg sandwich with mould inside, only to be refused a refund because 'You chose it, sir'.

(Don't worry, Snorkerz, it was an aggressive mountain of a woman who rebuked him thus - not you! :D)Mould? NO madam, it's a new variety of cress - our marketing department have introduced it as "Sandwich of the Month".

They didn't let me loose in Yorkshire very often! Personally, I would have given him a replacement and his money back - the management had about as much of a clue about catering as this government has about the private rented sector.

Mind you, I did once have a lady come up to the counter and give me an ear-full about a Chanel 4 programme the previous night which had done a hatchet job on railway food safety. She wasn't impressed when, in front of a queue of customers, I asked her to get her toddlers nappy-clad backside off my counter as my customers didn't want that in their sandwiches. Happy Days.

mind the gap
30-03-2010, 21:15 PM
Mould? NO madam, it's a new variety of cress - our marketing department have introduced it as "Sandwich of the Month".

They didn't let me loose in Yorkshire very often! Personally, I would have given him a replacement and his money back - the management had about as much of a clue about catering as this government has about the private rented sector.

Mind you, I did once have a lady come up to the counter and give me an ear-full about a Chanel 4 programme the previous night which had done a hatchet job on railway food safety. She wasn't impressed when, in front of a queue of customers, I asked her to get her toddlers nappy-clad backside off my counter as my customers didn't want that in their sandwiches. Happy Days.

Nappy Days, you mean! Just be glad she didn't leave the offending item on one of the tables in the dining car. I've seen that done before now. :eek:

Mars Mug
30-03-2010, 22:36 PM
Nappy Days, you mean! Just be glad she didn't leave the offending item on one of the tables in the dining car. I've seen that done before now. :eek:

You can't refer to a sweet innocent child as an 'offending item'........ well, actually I suppose you can.

Snorkerz
30-03-2010, 22:46 PM
You can't refer to a sweet innocent child as an 'offending item'........ well, actually I suppose you can.Believe me - it wasn't the 'sweet innocent child' MTG was referring too!