Why issue an S21 at start of tenancy?

[Ericthelobster]

What's the reason for the oft-given advice that an S21 notice should be served on tenants on the day they move in (presumably, even when the landlord is not necessarily wanting them out after the initial 6-month period)? I used to think that this was just a device used by agents to give them the excuse of charging fees for producing a new AST agreement but I know it's more than that.

If you do issue the S21 like this, what happens if at 6 months you want the tenancy to continue on a periodic basis - can you just tear the thing up (and issue another one later on when you *do* want to evict the tenants?!)

[lawstudent]

Issuing a valid S21 at the outset is a sensible precaution. It remains valid indefinitely. At any future time you can ask your tenant to leave and, if he fails to do so, seek possession through the court without further formality.

[Editor]

When problems develop between a landlord and tenant (such as rent arrears) there is almost invariably a communication break-down. In other words, the tenant avoids contact with the landlord or agent at all costs.
Have you ever tried serving a notice under these circumstances?
Far better to do it on the move-in day when everyone is in a co-operative frame of mind, and tenants will rarely object. You can also have the tenant's confirmation signature to prove service.
Make sure, however, the notice is served AFTER the tenancy has been signed, otherwise it would not be legal.

[Andy Parker]

If an s21 is not acted upon the courts will decide that the tenancy has continued and the s21 is no longer valid.In normal circumstances I would not try using one say 3 months after the expiry date - I would issue another (with the appropriate notice) to be on the safe side.

[lawstudent]

Andy is wrong. There is no time limit on issuing proceedings. I know of one case where possession was granted under the accelerated procedure on the basis of a notice that had expired several years before.

[Andy Parker]

Lawstudent - There is no 'right' or 'wrong' about about it.All other things being equal the longer you leave an s21 after expiry the less likely it is that a court will accept it.I would not advise delaying any more than about a month without good reason.If you think about it,otherwise a tenant under a periodic tenancy could have the threat of repossession without further notice hanging over him like a sword of Damocles for years!

[lawstudent]

Andy, you are wrong. The act is crystal clear on this matter. Provided valid notice has been given, no matter how long ago, the court "shall make an order for possession".

[oaktree]

I think not. If the notice served at the beginning of the tenancy was a S21(1)b and the tenancy has subsequently lapsed into a periodic tenancy, I suspect a judge would take the view that as the landlord had continued to accept rent he had accepted the change in tenancy to a periodic thus the s21(1)b would be invalid.

If the landlord could perhaps prove that he had made efforts to regain possession he might rely on it but I think it would be stretching the act somewhat if it was left more than a month or two with no action having been taken

[Andy Parker]

Lawstudent - Leave an s21 too long and the court will chuck it out.Be warned. This is from personal experience.It is also horse sense but that comes with experience.You are a relative 'greenhorn' with this sort of thing (not your fault).

[lawstudent]

be amazed, oaktree - S21(2) specifically says that a S21(1)(b) notice will have effect "notwithstanding that on the coming to an end of the fixed term tenancy a statutory periodic tenancy arises"

[oaktree]

be amazed, oaktree - S21(2) specifically says that a S21(1)(b) notice will have effect "notwithstanding that on the coming to an end of the fixed term tenancy a statutory periodic tenancy arises"Hardly amazing stuff is it? I think we all know (well, perhaps not all) that is in place to ensure that a landlord isn't disadvantaged simply because the AST has ended and the tenant is still in occupation despite the landlords wishes; otherwise what would be the point of serving a S21 within the two months immediately preceeding the end date of the tenancy if the notice was invalidated on the last day of the AST.

If your interpretation of S21 is correct, why would we need S21(4)a at all?

The question here was whether it would suffice after a tenancy had lapsed into a periodic that the landlord had accepted. How anyone could convince a judge that the S21(1)b they served perhaps 12 months ago, for a 6 month AST that has long ended, might be accepted to end a periodic tenancy that the landlord was quite happy with is beyond me.

In the 15 years that I have practised I have seen judges make some god awful decisions and even take it upon themselves to give discretion where they have no right to do so but I've never seen one completely ignore the guidelines of S21 to end a tenancy.

[Jennifer_M]

If a tenant is still in occupation after the s21 has expired then either the LL doesn't accept any money and take the tenant to court or he takes it as mesne profit and take the tenant to court no ?

If the landlord accepts rent and let it go along, could it be seen as the LL giving the tenant a new 6 months AST without written contract ?
As if the tenant's tenancy was terminated but a new one started 1 second after the 1st one expired ?

[oaktree]

This was the original question


If you do issue the S21 like this (at the beginning of the tenancy), what happens if at 6 months you want the tenancy to continue on a periodic basis - can you just tear the thing up (and issue another one later on when you *do* want to evict the tenants?!)

Still think you can end it with a S21(1)b?

[oaktree]

If a tenant is still in occupation after the s21 has expired then either the LL doesn't accept any money and take the tenant to court or he takes it as mesne profit and take the tenant to court no ?
The LL could still rely on the original S21(1)b, however I think the judge would question how long one might accept mesne profits if it went on too long without court action being instigated



If the landlord accepts rent and let it go along, could it be seen as the LL giving the tenant a new 6 months AST without written contract ?
As if the tenant's tenancy was terminated but a new one started 1 second after the 1st one expired ?If both parties have done nothing to end the tenancy and there is no further agreement (written or verbal) then it will lapse into a statutory periodic tenancy - which can only be ended with a S21(4)a or Section 8

[lawstudent]

oaktree - you say "If your interpretation of S21 is correct, why would we need S21(4)a at all?". Well, I think that one CCJ held that by a strict interpretation of S21(2) you do not. It all hangs on the meaning of the word "may". (haven't got the reference to hand but you can find it with google).

You then say "How anyone could convince a judge that the S21(1)b they served perhaps 12 months ago, for a 6 month AST that has long ended, might be accepted to end a periodic tenancy that the landlord was quite happy with is beyond me". The answer to that is that provided the notice said "possession is required after ..." without saying how long after, it would appear to remain valid for ever. And there is no saying that the LL was "happy" with the periodic tenancy just because he delayed taking court action.

Finally, you say "In the 15 years that I have practised I have seen judges make some god awful decisions and even take it upon themselves to give discretion where they have no right to do so but I've never seen one completely ignore the guidelines of S21 to end a tenancy." Quite so. But since the guidelines say nothing about time delay, there is nothing here for them to ignore.

[Jennifer_M]

If both parties have done nothing to end the tenancy and there is no further agreement (written or verbal) then it will lapse into a statutory periodic tenancy - which can only be ended with a S21(4)a or Section 8

I meant if a s21 was served at the start of the tenancy but the LL didn't do anything since then.

[oaktree]

I meant if a s21 was served at the start of the tenancy but the LL didn't do anything since then.That's what I thought you meant; if the landlord "just lets it go" as you put it(do we presume by that, that you mean the landlord is happy for the tenancy to continue?) then the AST expires naturally and is replaced by a statutory periodic tenancy not another AST, thus the original S21(1)b is no longer valid (apart from in lawstudents world ;) ) to end the tenancy as it is no longer an AST.

[oaktree]

Pay attention, oaktree!

S21(2) specifically says that a S21(1)(b) notice will have effect "notwithstanding that on the coming to an end of the fixed term tenancy a statutory periodic tenancy arises"
Oh now I see. Putting it in larger font suddenly makes that relevant :rolleyes:
Think about a different career, I've got a feeling you're going to fail your finals ;)

[oaktree]

Look! I've still got some toys in MY cot! but nobody else
seems to have any left!!!!!
How very odd you must be :)

As it happens I had confirmation yesterday evening that lawstudent (and it breaks my heart to say this ;) ) was actually correct about the recent case regarding S21; apparently possession was granted 3 years after the initial S21(1)b was served. I haven't seen the details of the case or the judges ruling as yet but once I have them I'll post the details up.

Lawstudent, you were right, I was wrong

[Andy Parker]

lawstudent - Your answers might satisfy the requirements of your examiners.

oaktree - lawstudent is wrong in practice.If you delay in the real world there is a high risk of the repossession claim failing.Don't take my word for it - ask any solicitor who deals with such cases.I can only trot out the old chestnut 'Hard cases make bad law'.I am sure you are aware that judges do overrule each other and draw distinctions between cases sometimes for differences that seem very minor to the layman.

[oaktree]

I didn't mean he was right about everything, just the bit about a S21 being accepted 3 years later. I still haven't seen the details of the case or whether there were any extenuating circumstances that the judge, rightly or wrongly, may have taken into account.

In practice I would never rely on it.

[Paul_f]

Last week the ARLA/NAEA joint exam board met and I ran this scenario past three of them who were:


Adrian Turner CEO - ARLA
Pauline Makepeace - Senior Lecturer in Housing Law - Reading University
Judienne Wood - ex Bradford & Bingley Lettings & Management Training Officer


They were quite adamant there was no time limit on a S.21 being valid (Law Student's correct assertion), and if a judge had decided a S.21 should be acted upon within a reasonable time (Andy Parker's opinion), then the judge was wrong; they also went on to say that judges often lacked knowledge of the subject on which they were presiding so left any such incorrect ruling open to appeal. As judges can more often than not be pompous and arrogant this didn't help matters; also they are not known for admitting mistakes.

I hope this clarifies the opinions posted!

P.S. Oaktree clearly had a sense of humour failure, but never mind!

[Andy Parker]

Paul - If you keep accepting rent the judge does not accept that it is 'mesne profit'.I don't have a problem with this view.If you don't want the property back for months or even years it is simpler and fairer to issue another s21 two months before you do want it back.Otherwise if an s21 is issued at the start of the tenancy and this always remains enforceable the tenant has no notice whatsoever once the tenancy becomes periodic and could incur liability for the LL's repossession costs straight away.

[Ericthelobster]

As the poster of the original query - thanks to all who've contributed to a very informative thread. I will certainly be issuing S21s at the outset of ASTs as a matter of course, from now on.

Follow-up question...
I understand you need to wait until the tenant's actually in the property before you issue the S21, but do you need to handle carefully the way in which you serve it and ask them to sign it? Is it OK to say 'this is just routine; if everything works out OK on both sides there's no reason why you won't be able to stay beyond 6 months' or is that potentially shooting yourself in the foot?

[Paul_f]

Andy. I also queried this with the academics at the meeting. There is nothing wrong in accepting payments as rent even after the S.21 notice has taken effect; there is no requirement to notify the tenant that you are accepting it as mesne profits.

Also I know it doesn't seem fair but you can issue a S.21 immediately after the tenancy has commenced and the tenant will never have the security of tenure beyond the fixed period and two months thereafter. Cruel world!

Eric. A tenant does not sign a S.21 that's the landlord's job. You are serving a notice, not presenting it for the approval of the tenant to acknowledge! You can serve it anytime after the tenancy has commenced. Also a S.21 is not conditional, it's unequivocal, so you can't say "if" something else were to happen. A S.21 is served "without reservation".

[Ericthelobster]

Thanks Paul - poor choice of words, I realise the tenant doesn't sign the S21 per se, just that I have seen it recommended that when you issue the S21 routinely on day 1, tenants do add their signature to the bottom of two copies, to acknowledge in writing that they have been served.

I'm still feel a bit unclear about how you do this in practice... Ok, you've moved the tenants in; signed the AST, done the inventory, everyone's happy and you have hopefully a good starting landlord-tenant relationship, when it's "oh yes, just before I go and let you get settled in, here's your notice of eviction". Do you/can you tell them not to worry, it's just routine, all landlords always do this? If the tenant asks 'so does this mean I definitely have to move out in 6 months, at the end of the AST', what's the answer? I assume if the landlord plays down the significance of the S21 too much, the tenant could and would use that against the landlord in any court proceedings, right?

[Andy Parker]

ericthelobster - You just get the tenant to acknowledge receipt of the notice ('proof of service') at the beginning of the tenancy.It may be difficult to get a signature later when trying to repossess.

Paul - my point is that the tenant gets NO notice in effect once the s21 has expired in your scenario (serve s21 now - instigate legal proceedings in a couple of years time).I am sure that agents and LLs would've cottoned on to this if it were true.Your academics would doubtless give lawstudent full marks.In the real world I prefer an empty property to an empty wallet so I will continue to take the easy route and use recent s21's as advised by my solicitor.You make the point that judges can be inconsistent - a great reason to keep it clean.

[Paul_f]

Andy. Point taken!

Eric. When I said "without reservation" do you not understand what it means? It's no good serving the notice on the tenant and then say it's just routine if the tenant asks if he has to move out after 6 months, because the answer is yes if you want your S.21 Notice to be valid. This is where Andy's point comes in when he says that when serving a S.21 notice during the fixed period it's advisable to act on it if the tenant doesn't move out, although in law you don't have to until you need/want to. An oral reminder to the tenant that the S.21 is still valid if you want the tenant out at shortish notice to prevent your taking court action to repossess would probably come as a surprise to him!

I think this has already been covered adequately in this thread of the problems it can create not least for the tenant.

[lawstudent]

Ericthelobster - I do agree it is a good idea at the outset of the fixed term to serve a S21 notice and ask the tenant to sign a copy to acknowledge receipt (this will be your "proof of service" if you ever need to go to court). You ask "If the tenant asks 'so does this mean I definitely have to move out in 6 months, at the end of the AST', what's the answer? I suggest something like, "No. My current hope is that the tenancy will run on for a long time. The notice says I will require possession after the fixed term has expired - but it does not say how long after"

and oaktree, andy et al - yes, I agree it would be wise to "refresh" an old S21 before starting proceedings, in case you get a judge who doesn't know the law. Judges are like grasshoppers - you never know which way they're going to jump. :D

[charger]

I got a tenant who is dodgy and nice at the same time, have to say.
His 6 months contract expired last week, and i was trying to get rid of him, as he at times harrasses other tenants by smoking joints, or playing loud music; However later he apologises and makes everybody laugh... Amazing but true, you cannot really hate him but neither you can trust him too...

At the end of the tenancy i talked to him and asked him to leave in a month time, as him and myself are not tied to any fix contract anymore. he prayed me to stay in the house and asked me instead to sign another contract for six months.
We then agreed for a contract of 3 months only. i have also made him sign the "End of Tenancy" form, by the 2nd of March, but have not dated it, because i will do it later two months before the 2nd of March, in just about a month time on the 6th of January.

Is it possible to do that ?
Ca i do the same with all other suspicious tenants, as a precaution ?>

Ie : At the start of a new tenancy with a new tenant, along with the 6 months Ast contract, i could make him sign the "End of Tenancy Form" , which i will serve at the forth month, in case his behaviour has not been nice .

By the way, can a Tenancy of six months be ended by giving two months notice to the tenants ? Mmhh, not sure if i have posted already this question... if so apology, i am getting old then ...

[Energise]

I got a tenant who is dodgy and nice at the same time, have to say.
His 6 months contract expired last week, and i was trying to get rid of him, as he at times harrasses other tenants by smoking joints, or playing loud music; However later he apologises and makes everybody laugh... Amazing but true, you cannot really hate him but neither you can trust him too...

At the end of the tenancy i talked to him and asked him to leave in a month
It needs to be 2 months, to end on a specific date with prescribed information.

time, as him and myself are not tied to any fix contract anymore.
You are tied to a periodic tenancy.

he prayed me to stay in the house and asked me instead to sign another contract for six months.
We then agreed for a contract of 3 months only. i have also made him sign the "End of Tenancy" form,
There is no such thing.

by the 2nd of March, but have not dated it, because i will do it later two months before the 2nd of March, in just about a month time on the 6th of January.
Then whatever it is will be invalid

Is it possible to do that ?
No
Ca i do the same with all other suspicious tenants, as a precaution ?>
No

Ie : At the start of a new tenancy with a new tenant, along with the 6 months Ast contract, i could make him sign the "End of Tenancy Form" , which i will serve at the forth month, in case his behaviour has not been nice .

By the way, can a Tenancy of six months be ended by giving two months notice to the tenants ?
Mmhh, not sure if i have posted already this question... if so apology, i am getting old then ...

Only to terminate at the end of the 6 months (unless there is a breach of the agreement).

[charger]

Thanks Energise
I would like him to leave as i wouldn't like one day somebody ringing me and telling me that the house is on fire cos he fell asleep with a joint in his hands.

My question will have to change then.
How can i get rid of him and be fair at the same time ? Sorry, the word "get rid" seems to be unfair and rude, it's just that i am a little scared of what might happen.
I am okay with the periodic tenancy which is normally from month to month, but do i still have to give 2 months notice in writing at least two days before the 6 months tenancy ends ?
Or ....
As In four months, you normally get to know very well your tenants, if i want somebody to leave at the 6th month, can i at least serve the notice at the 4th month ?
And what if he pretends to agree with it, and he doesn't leave at the 6th month ? By the the time, I get a court order it will take something like 8 weeks more.... therefore wasting 4 months with the risk that he won't pay for his last two months rent.

The laws are right and would like to stick to them as much as possible, as i don't fancy the idea of being added on the list of abusive landlord's .

[charger]

Just looked at two days ago, Mr Shed's answer : "you can have a three months fixed term for an Ast, but you cannot evict with section 21 until at least 6 months, so if the tenants choose not to leave and pay you the rent, you cannot do nothing until after 6 months.

"The notice period do change with different rent periods"
Does anybody know more about this ? Well maybe i am just hoping, that somebody tells me that i can give less than two months notice if the rent is paid every two weeks or weekly, but then again it still wouldn't be very fair towards my tenants. Good to know about this too anyway.

I have to say that it is very hard to speak to somebody and tell him/her to leave the house because of a bad behaviour; People get attached to the house so much and moreover at times even if they would like to leave they just can't because the change of address will affect part of their life.
What is really bad behaviour, apart from damaging the property or not paying the rent. What is bad for someone, might not be bad for somebody else.

[Energise]

"The notice period do change with different rent periods"
Does anybody know more about this ? Well maybe i am just hoping, that somebody tells me that i can give less than two months notice if the rent is paid every two weeks or weekly, but then again it still wouldn't be very fair towards my tenants. Good to know about this too anyway.


If paid weekly then it would be 8 weeks.

[sara]

I have just moved into a rental property and was given a s21 notice at the start of the tenancy. I was assured that this was just a precaution and that I would be able to stay on after the 6 months provided that I have been good tenant.

Is this legal. Also, if LL decided he did not want me to stay on what would the situation be. Would I have to have notice or would I just be "kicked out" on the last day?

[MrShed]

Yes it's legal. And no they wouldn't need to give any notice, but they cannot just throw you out....they would have to get a court order. It just speeds up the process thats all.

[P.Pilcher]

As MrShed says, it is perfectly legal. On or after the date that your tenancy expires, the landlord must apply to the county court for a possession order which, provided he has not made a mistake with his paperwork, will be granted. Technically then, you have had six months notice to quit. It will take a month or two from the time you get your notification of court action before you are actually evicted, but you will be liable for court fees e.t.c. if this happens.

If you wish to stay after the six month period, then your landlord must either provide you with a new AST (AND if he wants to a new S21 notice) or, he can write to you stating that he is prepared to let you remain as his tenant. Such a letter has the action of invalidating the s21 notice already served and he must provide you with a new one giving you two months notice if he subsequently wants you out.

On the other hand, you have no obligation whatsoever to give him any notice if you move out before or at the end of your current tenancy agreement, provided you pay your rent up to the last day if it.

P.P.

[Harry]

If you wish to stay after the six month period, then your landlord must either provide you with a new AST (AND if he wants to a new S21 notice) or, he can write to you stating that he is prepared to let you remain as his tenant. Such a letter has the action of invalidating the s21 notice already served and he must provide you with a new one giving you two months notice if he subsequently wants you out.


P.P.

Just when I thought I was getting the hang of this! I thought I'd learned through the advice given on this board that at the expiration of the six months, there was no need for any further documentation, and that a AST, with only a month's notice required, automatically came into force.

[Poppy]

Tenant
At the expiration of the fixed term, no notice by tenant is required if they intend to leave on the last day of the fixed term. If tenancy is statutory periodic then they must give at least one month’s notice.

Landlord
At the expiration of the fixed term, notice by landlord must be at least two months. Therefore by issuing s21 notice at the beginning of the tenancy the landlord is covered. It provides flexibility in case tenant turns out to be no good.

You should do your own research in one than one place when people give you “advice” anonymously on the internet.

[P.Pilcher]

The point is that if you remain after your fixed term has expired with neither letter from landlord or new AST in place, the landlord can serve court papers on you at any time without any form of notice whatsoever. He has already given you this by serving the S21 at the start of your tenancy. Thus it is important to vacate on or before the last day of your current tenancy unless you have some form of written indication that the landlord is happy for you to remain his tenant.

P.P.

[MrWoof]

Until recently, I disagreed with serving a section 21 notice at the beginning of a tenancy but I am dealing now with a tenant who is happy to avoid a section 8 notice by staying just inside the two month arrears limit leaving me with grounds 10 and 11 only. Fortunately, due to her saying she intended to claim HB fraudulently, I served her with a section 21 some three months ago, telling her that if she stayed legal and paid the rent, it would not be actioned. Papers are now with the county court. In future, I will serve notice at the beginning of a tenancy and tell the tenant that all being well, it will not be actioned. If the tenant is not happy with that, tough. I try to play it straight but I'm no longer prepared for people to take me for granted.

[Ruth Less]

In future, I will serve notice at the beginning of a tenancy and tell the tenant that all being well, it will not be actioned. If the tenant is not happy with that, tough. I try to play it straight but I'm no longer prepared for people to take me for granted.


That sounds to me like a way of getting more bad tenants. Surely a good tenant would do what the paperwork says and obey the S21 by vacating the property. With the method your are going to use, how does the tenant know if they can stay on or not? If you want the tenant to stay surely you would need to cancel the S21 in writing, say at four months into the initial fixed term, or else the tenant will start looking to move.

If you are not going to revoke the S21 in writing then I would suggest that any tenant relying on the landlords word (that they will have no way of proving later) rather than the paperwork is as dodgy as the landlord trying it on.

test

[MrShed]

Ruth(and others)....recently been having the same debate over the impact of serving S21's in this way here:

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=23126

Saves me posting all of what I've said over there again :p

[Ruth Less]

Ruth(and others)....recently been having the same debate over the impact of serving S21's in this way here:

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=23126

Saves me posting all of what I've said over there again :p


Interesting thread. I have the same questions for you too. How is a tenant supposed to know if they can stay on or not? Do you let them know in writing or verbally only? How long before the end of the initial fixed term do you let them know?

Also if this became widespread practice how would landlords feel about tenants routinely ignoring S21's? I was reading the website of a company that do evictions and they did say that most tenants do move on receipt of the S21.

I can see this getting very confusing.

[RichieP]

Calm down Ruth.

Issuing a S21 as a preecaution at the start of the tenacy, along with a nice friendly explanation helps both parties. The landlord explains that, as long as the tenant(s) comply with the tenancy agreement, it will not be actioned upon. Having received it, the tenants know the landlord can take action at the end of the tenancy, should they wish to do so.

Your point about most tenants moving out on receipt of an S21 applies to those tenants that receive it at the end of the tenancy where the landlord does actually want possession.

[Worldlife]

Agree with Richie - the friendly explanation will be accepted by the tenants who intend to comply with the tenancy agreement and who the landlord would probably want to keep.

[Ruth Less]

Agree with Richie - the friendly explanation will be accepted by the tenants who intend to comply with the tenancy agreement and who the landlord would probably want to keep.

Yes, but when you get towards the end of the fixed term and want to keep the tenant what do you do to let them know that and when? You make it sound like even if you wanted to keep the tenant you wouldn't tell them and are implying the tenant should stay on with a valid S21 in place and just assume the landlord probably wants to keep them. This contradicts all other advice I've seen including this:


If you wish to stay after the six month period, then your landlord must either provide you with a new AST (AND if he wants to a new S21 notice) or, he can write to you stating that he is prepared to let you remain as his tenant. Such a letter has the action of invalidating the s21 notice already served and he must provide you with a new one giving you two months notice if he subsequently wants you out.

So my simple question is do you revoke the S21 once you have decided to keep the tenant on and if so when do you do it?

[Poppy]

Ruth Less what angle are you coming at this from; are you a landlord, tenant or agent?

Tenants and landlords who have a good relationship would naturally talk to each other about the other’s intentions. I see no confusion arising (or continuing) out of issuing an s21 notice at the beginning of the tenancy.

The s21 notice does not need to be revoked because sensible landlords would put on the notice that “possession is required after x date”. No action needs to be taken if the landlord and tenant are happy to continue on a statutory periodic tenancy.

I'll say it again - it provides flexibility in case the tenant turns out to be no good.

[Worldlife]

Yes, but when you get towards the end of the fixed term and want to keep the tenant what do you do to let them know that and when? You make it sound like even if you wanted to keep the tenant you wouldn't tell them and are implying the tenant should stay on with a valid S21 in place and just assume the landlord probably wants to keep them. This contradicts all other advice I've seen including this:



So my simple question is do you revoke the S21 once you have decided to keep the tenant on and if so when do you do it?

Ruth Less - dependant on the section used a S21 can have an indefinite life.

For more information see Authorative thread and link by Paul_f (http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=642)

There are bad landlords and bad tenants but that should not prevent good tenants and good landlords discussing each others point of view in a friendly manner

[Ruth Less]

Ruth Less what angle are you coming at this from; are you a landlord, tenant or agent?

I've been both a tenant, landlord and owner occupier in the past but have just sold up both properties so am now only a tenant.


Tenants and landlords who have a good relationship would naturally talk to each other about the other’s intentions. I see no confusion arising (or continuing) out of issuing an s21 notice at the beginning of the tenancy.

I've had two tenancies recently and in both cases had no communication with the landlord, it was all done through the agency. As such I didn't have any idea of what the landlords plans were and as it turned out my last one decided he wanted to sell so I got an S21 and left on that date (which was at the end of my second fixed term). As for having a good relationship with the agency, it was hard enough getting them to remember what was said the day before by the time you've spoken to yet another person as the other one is only part time etc etc.


The s21 notice does not need to be revoked because sensible landlords would put on the notice that “possession is required after x date”.

I know it doesn't need to be revoked. What I asked is do you revoke it (voluntarily) once you have decided to keep the tenant on?


No action needs to be taken if the landlord and tenant are happy to continue on a statutory periodic tenancy.

Yes I see that but how exactly does the landlord let the tenant know he is happy to continue? If he does nothing then the tenant is living on a statutory periodic tenancy with a valid S21 that he has ignored. Isn't that putting the tenant in the wrong? I don't think I would be happy to do that.


I'll say it again - it provides flexibility in case the tenant turns out to be no good.
Yes I can see that. But the point is I'd like to know is what does the landlord do if say after 4/5 months he wants to keep the tenant? Normally the tenant thinks I haven't been given notice so I can say. But if the tenant has been given notice isn't he then in a quandary what to do? I'd ask the landlord for written permission to stay on, would you give that? If you refused to give me that I'd be confused...

[RichieP]

Perhaps your experience with not so friendly/good/amiable landlords/agents/devil's spawn are tainting your perspective. I have an excellent relationship with my tenants. If I decide to issue them with an S21 "just in case" I'll have a chat with them about the whys and wherefores, and reassure them that I intend to take no action on its expiry, unless they breach the tenancy or I need the property to move into or sell.

If that were the case I would still give them plenty of notice to allow them to find somewhere else and prevent unnecessary court action.

It doesn't always have to get unpleasant and messy in this lovely little world we live in.

[pms]

[QUOTE=Poppy]Tenant
At the expiration of the fixed term, no notice by tenant is required if they intend to leave on the last day of the fixed term. If tenancy is statutory periodic then they must give at least one month’s notice.


There is no such thing as a statutory periodic tenancy.See below:


103. In section 21 of that Act (recovery of possession on expiry or termination of assured shorthold tenancy), in subsection (1)(a) for the words "a statutory periodic tenancy" there shall be substituted "an assured shorthold periodic tenancy (whether statutory or not)".

Taken from the Local goverment and Housing Act(1989).So it could be argued that all S21 NOTICES are invalid due to improper wording.Poppy I suggest you brush up on the law.

[pms]

I have just moved into a rental property and was given a s21 notice at the start of the tenancy. I was assured that this was just a precaution and that I would be able to stay on after the 6 months provided that I have been good tenant.

Is this legal. Also, if LL decided he did not want me to stay on what would the situation be. Would I have to have notice or would I just be "kicked out" on the last day?

No its not legal.An S21 is a NOSP(Notice of seeking pocession) which a landlord cannot issue in the first six months of a fixed term tenancy.My advice to anyone who's doing this don't read S20 of the HA(1988)as amended.Because today I have just challanged a S21 NOTICE for a client which was thrown out by the judge on the point above.

[Ruth Less]

Perhaps your experience with not so friendly/good/amiable landlords/agents/devil's spawn are tainting your perspective.

Yes, and I expect your experience is doing the same for you.


I have an excellent relationship with my tenants.

I'm not against this procedure totally, I can see it's useful in the beginning when you don't know the tenant, but once you've got through the first six months and have achieved this excellent relationship with the tenant then I don't see why you won't issue paperwork to match the verbal agreement and put that they can stay on in writing rather than forcing them to leave or ignore the S21.

Failure to do this means two things for the tenant. They are losing their two months notice and they are risking losing good references as they have ignored the S21 and any eviction will go on their "record".


If I decide to issue them with an S21 "just in case" I'll have a chat with them about the whys and wherefores, and reassure them that I intend to take no action on its expiry, unless they breach the tenancy or I need the property to move into or sell.

Yes, but it's the selling one that seems to be happening a lot round here. I'd only just moved due to one sale and presto next door to me, also a BTL, goes up for sale! Looking at my landlords gross yield (4.38%) against his purchase price frankly I expect him to be selling too although the agent assures me he is in it for the long term.


If that were the case I would still give them plenty of notice to allow them to find somewhere else and prevent unnecessary court action.

You know you are a fair and good person and I know I am too :). But if you wouldn't put a verbal agreement in writing I would not feel comfortable no matter how nice you have been. You are saying "I'm a nice and fair person, but this is a verbal only deal, I'm not going to trust you enough to put it on paper". This is why I would be confused.


It doesn't always have to get unpleasant and messy in this lovely little world we live in.
Yes, so once it's all amicable and you know the tenant why not have the trust and loveliness going both ways and put the real situation in writing?

I expect the tenants that accept this deal are either not so good or don't really understand what's going on.

[Ruth Less]

Tenant
If tenancy is statutory periodic then they must give at least one month’s notice.


Not once the S21 is in force as we are discussing in this thread.

So the other type of tenant who would be happy with living on a periodic tenancy with an expired S21 is one who wants to move with no notice. I see that could be useful for some people. I may even go for it myself in a year or so when I'm in the process of buying again and don't know what date the purchase will complete. It will save money on not having to pay rent and the mortgage during any overlap as one would do if having to give notice.

I take it in the little chat you have with your tenants you do explain that once the S21 has expired and they are on a periodic tenancy they can leave on any day they like with no notice to you...

[Energise]

Not once the S21 is in force as we are discussing in this thread.

I would appreciate any evidence to support this thought?

I take it in the little chat you have with your tenants you do explain that once the S21 has expired and they are on a periodic tenancy they can leave on any day they like with no notice to you...

I would appreciate any evidence to support this thought?



I know that thought has been populated on this forum but I have never seen anything to ever back it up, I have asked the origanal poster of this thought to back it up but there was no response.

[davidjohnbutton]

No its not legal.An S21 is a NOSP(Notice of seeking pocession) which a landlord cannot issue in the first six months of a fixed term tenancy.My advice to anyone who's doing this don't read S20 of the HA(1988)as amended.Because today I have just challanged a S21 NOTICE for a client which was thrown out by the judge on the point above.


Not quite PMS - a landlord can issue the S21 notice at any time during the fixed period but it cannot expire on a date that is less than six months from the date the tenancy commenced. The notice period is two months for S21

So for example, tenancy commenced 1st January - notice issued 2nd January citing 30th June as expiry date is legal.
But a notice expiring say 31st May would be invalid as the tenancy is only 5 months old.

[Ruth Less]

I would appreciate any evidence to support this thought?


Are we taking about the same thing here? I meant:

The landlord has issued a valid S21 notice requiring possession after x date. After x date the landlord takes no further action to evict the tenant but in addition doesn't revoke the S21 so it is still valid. The tenant doesn't leave as the landlord said it would be OK stay on when he issued the S21 notice. Therefore the landlord is free to take court action for eviction after x date without giving any notice. Likewise the tenant is free to leave after x date without giving any notice. The reason this is possible is because the S21, asking for possession after x date, is still valid.

Which bit of this do you disagree with?

[Worldlife]

by Ruth Less You know you are a fair and good person and I know I am too . But if you wouldn't put a verbal agreement in writing I would not feel comfortable no matter how nice you have been. You are saying "I'm a nice and fair person, but this is a verbal only deal, I'm not going to trust you enough to put it on paper". This is why I would be confused.

A verbal agreement can be a contract. Suggest the tenant has a witness. There is nothing to prevent the tenant writing the landlord a friendly note confirming his or her understanding of the landlord's advice concerning the enforcement of the Section 21 notice.

Methinks Ruth you are disregarding that the landlord is trusting a tenant with a valuable property and that a bad tenant can cause much damage and in owing rent can cause the landlord financial difficulties. The landlord too might well be in need of an income from the property to pay for the mortgage and other outgoings that are part of the cashflow of a business operation.

[Worldlife]

Not quite PMS - a landlord can issue the S21 notice at any time during the fixed period but it cannot expire on a date that is less than six months from the date the tenancy commenced. The notice period is two months for S21

So for example, tenancy commenced 1st January - notice issued 2nd January citing 30th June as expiry date is legal.
But a notice expiring say 31st May would be invalid as the tenancy is only 5 months old.

That's my understanding of the situation too - could it be that the Judge dealing with the case presented by PMS didn't know the law and the landlord was not adequately represented :)

[pms]

That's my understanding of the situation too - could it be that the Judge dealing with the case presented by PMS didn't know the law and the landlord was not adequately represented :)

It wasn't the case of the judge not knowing the law.Djb hit the nail on the head.If the S21 had been issued the day after the tenancy started then no problem.Because it was issued before the tenant moved in it was deemed to be invalid.As I've said before the law is a minefield and it is essential that the paperwork is in order as this is what the CCJ's are more intrested in at the moment

[Worldlife]

Thanks PMS for you clarification.

So we all now agree that David's summary is correct and my learned friend PMS has no objection :)

PS Apologies to the Judge concerned now that PMS has clearly defined the key issue for his particular case :D

[sara]

Thank you for all the information. I must say I am still not quite clear on our position. I find it perfectly reasonable for the Landlord to have issued the s21 at the beginning of the tennancy as he does not know that we are going to look after the property and abide by the terms of the agreement.

However, despite him saying that he is in it for the long term, if he decides to sell after 6 months and not renew we are in a difficult situation as we may have had no notice. Would the best course of action to be to write to the landlord at 4 months stating that we wish to stay on at the end of the 6 months and for him to confirm this is ok in writing?

One other thing, our tenancy agreement and s21 notice are both dated for the same day - does that make the s21 invalid in any event. We are good tenants and look after the property as if it were our own. Like I said, I am happy to have the s21 but it does worry me in case the landlord's plans change and we end up trying to find a property with very little or no notice. I would not want the s21 to have to be enforced.

[Worldlife]

Sara you sound an ideal tenant :)

I shouldn't think that if he intends to continue letting the property the landlord would want to lose you!

Not many landlords are in the fortunate position of saying that there would not be future circumstances in which they may need to sell the property they are renting to you.

If you trust your landlord and the landlord trusts you there should be no reason why the end date of the tenancy cannot be negotiated as the landlord himself may prefer amicable agreement rather than the souring situation of Court actions

If you discuss these issues with the landlord keep a record of the conversations as this might be useful evidence.

At the end of the day it will be the landlord's choice if he wishes to go to Court to obtain a Possession Order and that will give you longer in occupation. The nasty situation, involving bailiffs, only arises if you do not comply with a Possession Order.

Agree the whole situation is overcomplicated and needs correction by simple Codes of Practice and prescribed forms that can easily be understood by both tenants and landlords.

Reading these pages does make one believe there are no good landlord tenant relationships :)

[Ruth Less]

sarah,

What you do really depends on your circumstances namely how much security you want and how much time it would take you to move. Some people rent furnished properties so moving is just a case of moving a few personal possessions, others rent unfurnished and so have a whole house full of stuff to shift.

It seems to me your choices are:

1. A new agreement for another fixed term. This could be another six months or longer. This would invalidate the current S21.

2. Go on to a periodic tenancy and the landlord revokes the S21 in writing. Then the landlord would need to give you two months notice and you would need to give him one month. These notices need to end at the end of a period.

3. Go on to a periodic tenancy and the landlord does not revoke the S21. In this case the landlord is free to take court action for eviction without giving any notice and you are free to leave without giving any notice.

So what suits your lifestyle best. Personally I wouldn't choose 3 unless I wasn't planning to rent again but would be happy with 1 or 2. Writing to the landlord at 4 months suggesting your preference would seem sensible, that way you can get it arranged before you would have to start organising moving. If it turns out you do have to move after the first six months you will need time to arrange it. I expect the landlord will be asking you your intentions at 4 months anyway. If the landlord won't put any arrangements you make in writing then I would walk, but that's just me I like the matching paperwork!

PS, the landlord wanting to sell is the thing that's happened to me before and given the current climate I expect it will become more common.

[Worldlife]

A very helpful summary Ruth_Less :)

If I were a tenant I would be wary of your recommendation 3


3. Go on to a periodic tenancy and the landlord does not revoke the S21. In this case the landlord is free to take court action for eviction without giving any notice and you are free to leave without giving any notice.

If the periodic tenancy continues the tenant will be regarded as liable for the rent until the date he or she vacates the property. Although the tenant would not be required to give advance notice of that intention it would be sensible to put in writing to the landlord that the property has or will be vacated by a given date and make arrangements for the return of the keys and deposit.

Would others agree that if this is not done the landlord must be certain the tenant has left the property. One safe way to ensure the property has been vacated would be to proceed with the Possession Order and if the tenant fails to respond to that Order there could be liability for rent until the time the Possession Order is enforced.

It is important that both tenant and landlord know the legal possibilities but as I've written before the best way forward is for both to negotiate and build up trust.

It is not therefore quite right to say
It seems to me your choices are:

The choices will be determined by the landlord who will have regard to his experience of good and bad tenants and his trust (or otherwise) of the current tenant.

The choice is not determined by one individual but as a result of negotiation and discussion.

Posts such as those by Ruth_Less can only help work towards the understanding of the unduly complex law that, without Codes of Practice and easy to complete Prescribed Forms, is neither fair to good tenants nor good landlords.

[Ruth Less]

A very helpful summary Ruth_Less :)

Thank you. :)


If I were a tenant I would be wary of your recommendation 3

Not my recommendation, it's what I've learnt from this thread and not one I would go for myself.



If the periodic tenancy continues the tenant will be regarded as liable for the rent until the date he or she vacates the property. Although the tenant would not be required to give advance notice of that intention it would be sensible to put in writing to the landlord that the property has or will be vacated by a given date and make arrangements for the return of the keys and deposit.


Good point, leaving without telling the landlord at all is not sensible. The tenant should write the letter as you suggest and arrange key handover etc. but it need only be done in the last day or two as opposed to the more usual months notice.



It is important that both tenant and landlord know the legal possibilities but as I've written before the best way forward is for both to negotiate and build up trust.


I wonder if the landlords that impose option 3 explain to the tenant that they do not need to give the usual months notice?



The choices will be determined by the landlord who will have regard to his experience of good and bad tenants and his trust (or otherwise) of the current tenant.

The choice is not determined by one individual but as a result of negotiation and discussion.


I listed the full range as it's important for tenants to know what's available. Obviously the landlord may not allow some of them but this is all part of the matching of the correct tenant with the correct property/landlord. I've only dealt through agents so far but I do ask about the landlord's intentions up front on viewing and use that as a basis on whether to chose that property.

As I said if it turned out the landlord was going to impose option 3 I would leave because I would not be happy going against the paperwork no matter what had been said privately. I am a strictly by the book person, but that does mean I am a good tenant, always paying bang on time, keeping the property well, getting my deposit back in full without dispute etc. Once the agent/landlord has done their first inspection (typically 3 or 4 months in) and seen the rent being paid then I expect them to recognise a good tenant when they see one and offer some security by giving me the two months notice. If it really came down to option 3 or leave then I would leave.



Posts such as those by Ruth_Less can only help work towards the understanding of the unduly complex law that, without Codes of Practice and easy to complete Prescribed Forms, is neither fair to good tenants nor good landlords.


I suspect there are many tenants (and possibly landlords who use agencies) who just sign whatever they are given without understanding the import. Hardly surprising as it is unduly complex as you say.

[RichieP]

I think there's some misleading information popped up here. I'm 99% certain that it has been stated that a tenant can leave at the end of the AST without notice. However, once into a periodic tenancy, they need to give a month's notice. They can't just leave and not be liable for the rent.

[P.Pilcher]

Let's have another go: The law insists that any new agreement must give a tenant who pays their rent and does not contravene the other terms of the tenancy agreement a minimum of six months security of tenure. Once that six months is up, then the tenancy can continue with the landlord being required to give two months security of tenure.

A valid S21 notice changes this because provided it has been correctly served more than two months before the expiry of the original agreement (which will be a minimum of six months after it's commencement) the tenant no longer has any security of tenure whatsoever. A landlord can say what he wants once the fixed term has expired, but he can take court action to remove the tenant at any time he likes. Maybe the landlord has no intention of evicting the tenant, but his financial circumstances change for the worse requiring him to realise some assets ASAP. He may be obliged to fork out £150 to start that court action and the tenant has but a few weeks to move out and is liable for the court costs before the bailiffs move in.

No - option 3 given above is a "Sword of Damocles" over a tenant's head and should be avoided at all costs.

P.P.

[Ruth Less]

I think there's some misleading information popped up here. I'm 99% certain that it has been stated that a tenant can leave at the end of the AST without notice. However, once into a periodic tenancy, they need to give a month's notice. They can't just leave and not be liable for the rent.

RichieP, It seems you have missed the point here. In this thread several landlords have indicated that they serve an S21 during the initial fixed term to expire at the end of the fixed term then offer the tenant a periodic tenancy WITHOUT REVOKING THE S21. They do this so they can start eviction procedures against the tenant WITHOUT NOTICE at any time after the fixed period ends if they wish. In this case as the S21 is still valid the tenant is also free to leave WITHOUT NOTICE (expect for informing the landlord at the end as Worldlife pointed out).

A procedure you seemed quite familiar with earlier in the thread:


Issuing a S21 as a preecaution at the start of the tenacy, along with a nice friendly explanation helps both parties. The landlord explains that, as long as the tenant(s) comply with the tenancy agreement, it will not be actioned upon. Having received it, the tenants know the landlord can take action at the end of the tenancy, should they wish to do so.


I have an excellent relationship with my tenants. If I decide to issue them with an S21 "just in case" I'll have a chat with them about the whys and wherefores, and reassure them that I intend to take no action on its expiry, unless they breach the tenancy or I need the property to move into or sell.

I believe the landlords that impose this are yourself (although now I'm not sure, perhaps you could clarify what you do once you reach the end of a fixed term with an S21 served from the start if you want the tenant to remain), MrShed, Poppy, MrWoof (newly converted to this method), possibly sarah's landlord as she was served an S21 at the start of her fixed term. Worldlife seems new to this but approving of it.

I don't think I've got this procedure wrong, as I summarised it for Energise asking what bits were disagreed with and none were forthcoming and MrShed confirmed the same in his housepricecrash thread that he linked to. If you do have a reason why the tenant has to give a month's notice when he has a valid and expired S21 hanging over him please say! The landlords on this thread (including yourself) seem pretty clear they can proceed to court for eviction without notice from this point, which is obviously true as that's what the S21 is for. So in this case it seems clear the tenant is free to leave. In short landlords can't have their cake and eat it unless they have a gullible and uninformed tenant.

[Worldlife]

I've only have one property to let but within the experience of managing that property have found the following:-


Tenant A - splendid relationship and alway paid rent on time and kept property spotless. Goodwill extended to landlord attending minor items that were not strictly his responsibility. New AST not issued but ongoing situation confirmed by negotiated agreement for a periodic tenancy agreement (six monthly periods) with rent reviews. Security of tenure suited both tenant and landlord.
Tenant B Mother was guarantor. Towards end of initial six month period girl friend moved in. Offered new AST including girlfriend but tenant and guarantor did not wish to give girlfriend any security of tenure. Tenant arranged for a LIcense for the girlfriend to occupy. Section 21 issued two months after start of periodic tenancy similar to tenant A. Reason reported burglary and damage was a domestic incident. Tenant became unemployed and despite generous Housing Benefit fell into arrears. County Court claim made for damages and rent arrears at end of tenancy.
Tenant C Would not be able to pass any financial tests - income too low. Decision to grant tenancy based on superb reference from his Manager who also offered to be guarantor. Manager satisfied financial requirements. As a precaustion Section 21 issued after tenant fell into arrears due to cashflow problems. Will be discussing with tenant whether to grant a joint tenancy for him and his sister. Issue will revolve around satisfactory guarantors. May decide it best here to leave S21 in abeyance and let initial AST lapse to standard periodic terms


Again one cannot be dogmatic and say that tenant C is entitled to have the security of a new six monthly tenure. Tenant A is IMHO the only tenant who by his conduct of the tenancy deserved such security.

Maybe the security of the landlord needs to be brought into the equation :)

[RichieP]

From Pain Smith website.

Taking the above example the tenant would have to give one period’s notice which
means his notice should expire on the 14th of a month. His notice period would
therefore expire on the 14th of February 2004. The fact that the landlord had served two
months’ notice would not affect the tenant’s rights.

Source (http://www.painsmith.co.uk/painsmithfiles/articles/termination.pdf)

[Ruth Less]

Tenant A - splendid relationship and alway paid rent on time and kept property spotless. Goodwill extended to landlord attending minor items that were not strictly his responsibility. New AST not issued but ongoing situation confirmed by negotiated agreement for a periodic tenancy agreement (six monthly periods) with rent reviews. Security of tenure suited both tenant and landlord.

...skip to next bit about tenant A...


Section 21 issued two months after start of periodic tenancy similar to tenant A.

Let's see if I've read this right. Are you saying Tenant A was living on a periodic tenancy with a valid S21 in place and that this tenant remained after the S21 expired (in other words the S21 required possession after date x and the tenant remained after date x)?

Why did you issue the S21 and did you revoke it in writing later on?

What form did the "ongoing situation confirmed by negotiated agreement" take, in writing or verbal only?

What exactly do you mean by "six monthly periods"? I always thought that if the rent is paid monthly then the period is a month.

How was the "security of tenure" achieved in this case?

Sorry to say this Worldlife, and nothing personal here, but it seems to me like you are imposing this "Sword of Damocles" over a tenant's head while tyring to disguise it with vague talk of "negotiated agreement" and "Security of tenure suited both tenant and landlord." I think you do this because it relies on the tenant being ignorant of the position they are in. Tenant A had no security of tenure whatsoever after the date on the S21 passed!

[Energise]

RichieP, It seems you have missed the point here. In this thread several landlords have indicated that they serve an S21 during the initial fixed term to expire at the end of the fixed term then offer the tenant a periodic tenancy WITHOUT REVOKING THE S21. They do this so they can start eviction procedures against the tenant WITHOUT NOTICE at any time after the fixed period ends if they wish.

Surely if offering a periodic tenancy at the end of a fixed term that would be a contractual periodic and not a statutory, which would be a new tenancy agreement voiding the S.21. :)

[Ruth Less]

From Pain Smith website.

Taking the above example the tenant would have to give one period’s notice which
means his notice should expire on the 14th of a month. His notice period would
therefore expire on the 14th of February 2004. The fact that the landlord had served two
months’ notice would not affect the tenant’s rights.

Source (http://www.painsmith.co.uk/painsmithfiles/articles/termination.pdf)

Thats after the S21 has been issued but before it expires! You have completely missed the point. We are talking here about the tenant staying on after the S21 expires (because the landlord says they can but doesn't revoke the S21). In the example you cite that would mean after March 14th.

Are you guys confused or deliberately trying it on with the tenants so that you can get rid of them asap if you wish but they don't twig this?

[Ruth Less]

Surely if offering a periodic tenancy at the end of a fixed term that would be a contractual periodic and not a statutory, which would be a new tenancy agreement voiding the S.21. :)

Depends how they offer it, I think they do it unofficially verbally only, so the tenant couldn't prove anything. In this case the S21 does remain valid.

[P.Pilcher]

You've got it Ruth! A section 21 notice can only be retracted with certainty by an appropriate letter from the landlord.

P.P.

[pms]

Depends how they offer it, I think they do it unofficially verbally only, so the tenant couldn't prove anything. In this case the S21 does remain valid.

That is of course if the S21 has been filled in properly.My own opinion is that many S21 NOTICES are invalid when they go to court because of the wording.

Im going to pose a question here: If a S21(NOSP) is issued and the end date is the 13th of the month.If the landlord accepts rent on the 13th would he not in effect be creating a new tenancy.

[Energise]

That is of course if the S21 has been filled in properly.My own opinion is that many S21 NOTICES are invalid when they go to court because of the wording.

Im going to pose a question here: If a S21(NOSP) is issued and the end date is the 13th of the month.If the landlord accepts rent on the 13th would he not in effect be creating a new tenancy.

No, service of an S.21 does not end a tenancy so the tenancy is still continuing.

[Worldlife]

...skip to next bit about tenant A...

Let's see if I've read this right. Are you saying Tenant A was living on a periodic tenancy with a valid S21 in place and that this tenant remained after the S21 expired (in other words the S21 required possession after date x and the tenant remained after date x)?

No Tenant A was never issued with a Section 21 Notice

Why did you issue the S21 and did you revoke it in writing later on?

The S21 Notice was issued on tenants B and C for the reasons stated. Tenant B complied with the notice and the situation with Tenant C is ongoing.

What form did the "ongoing situation confirmed by negotiated agreement" take, in writing or verbal only?

What exactly do you mean by "six monthly periods"? I always thought that if the rent is paid monthly then the period is a month.

How was the "security of tenure" achieved in this case?

For tenants A and B the periods of the tenancy after end of the initial AST were given a six months. It has been explained in previous posts that the operative date of S21 served on tenant B would at the end of a period and the S21 served on tenant C would come into force at the end of the initial AST.

Sorry to say this Worldlife, and nothing personal here, but it seems to me like you are imposing this "Sword of Damocles" over a tenant's head while tyring to disguise it with vague talk of "negotiated agreement" and "Security of tenure suited both tenant and landlord." I think you do this because it relies on the tenant being ignorant of the position they are in. Tenant A had no security of tenure whatsoever after the date on the S21 passed!

Sorry Ruth, nothing personal here, but if you had to cope with tenants refusing to pay rent and trashing property you might take a different viewpoint. A landlord needs to be quite careful about letting the reins go loose too soon. Maybe the best way forward instead of negative action strangulating landlords with unduly complex legislation would be for the Government to provide bonds for tenants in which they provide assurances that Housing Benefit will be paid promptly, that there will be no clawback from the landlord because of tenant fraud and unfair wear and tear or damages to the rented property will be repaid without undue delay. After all mortgage lenders demand indemnity policies for some borrowers !!!

[pms]

Sorry Ruth, nothing personal here, but if you had to cope with tenants refusing to pay rent and trashing property you might take a different viewpoint. A landlord needs to be quite careful about letting the reins go loose too soon. Maybe the best way forward instead of negative action strangulating landlords with unduly complex legislation would be for the Government to provide bonds for tenants in which they provide assurances that Housing Benefit will be paid promptly, that there will be no clawback from the landlord because of tenant fraud and unfair wear and tear or damages to the rented property will be repaid without undue delay. After all mortgage lenders demand indemnity policies for some borrowers !!!

But Worldlife is that not the risk that you take! Let's face it not all tenant's and landlords are angels.I don't agree with properties being trashed or rent not being paid unless there is a reason.I agree that the legislation is complexed and that a more simplistic approach is required.

[Ruth Less]

For tenants A and B the periods of the tenancy after end of the initial AST were given a six months. It has been explained in previous posts that the operative date of S21 served on tenant B would at the end of a period and the S21 served on tenant C would come into force at the end of the initial AST.

This has got me lost. It sounds as if the tenants are paying rent every six months rather than monthly. But at least it now seems that you are only serving S21's when you mean to get rid of the tenant rather than as a matter of routine. I'm glad to hear tenant A wasn't served an S21 so I obviously read your "Section 21 issued two months after start of periodic tenancy similar to tenant A." wrong.

As for tenants "refusing to pay rent and trashing property" they need evicting.

Is it usual or unusual for landlords to serve S21's as a precaution, like Sarah's landlord did, when they have no intention of evicting and no signs of bad behaviour from the tenant?

MrShed explains it best on housepricecrash (I hope it's OK to quote this MrShed but you did link to the thread and it's written out more clearly than anyone else has done):


It is common practice with many letting agents(indeed some would say good practice, myself included) to issue a Section 21 at the beginning of the tenancy to prevent delays at the end SHOULD the landlord wish to evict ASAP after the fixed term. However, if a S21 is issued in this way it should usually be explained to the tenant that this is exactly what it is for....a safety net, rather than guaranteeing to evict at the end of the fixed term. It does reduce the potential security of tenure for a tenant, but not massively, and if explained properly there is no reason for panic with tenants.

This S21 will remain valid indefinitely after the fixed term(the true indefinite time allowed has never been tested thoroughly in the courts, but there is no reason in law, or practically in the courts, why such a notice could not remain valid for many years after the fixed term has expired). However, should a new tenancy be offered, and/or a new contract signed, then the notice would become invalid. In the example explained above, as said by Mr Crunch would lead to an invalid S21, I would disagree. No new tenancy has occurred, there is nothing to say that a S21 must be acted upon at the end of the fixed term of an AST(and before a SPT has begun) for it to remain valid. Saying they can stay on is simply extending the current tenancy into a statutory periodic one, and as such the S21 would remain valid for the duration of the SPT. Had the landlord offered a new 6 month fixed term however, the notice would be invalidated.

A currently "on file" so to speak S21 notice does NOT prevent a tenancy from going into a normal periodic tenancy. The landlord has no requirement to act upon a served S21. As a periodic tenancy is merely classed as an extension to a current tenancy, not a new tenancy in itself, the Section 21 remains valid during the periodic tenancy, and there is no requirement to sign a new minimum 6 month contract. The policy of some LA/LLs to serve the S21 at the beginning of the tenancy may make it unsuitable for some tenants, in particular those who would need at least the two months notice to leave DURING the periodic tenancy.

Imp....yes, it would remove the need for notice from the side of the tenant.

So how many of you landlords here issue precautionary S21's and don't revoke them once you've decided the tenant can stay (the "Sword of Damocles" approach)? Can we have a quick straw poll of those that do and those that don't?

[P.Pilcher]

Well, I don't. The law gives the tenant 6 months security of tenure at the start anyway, so if he the relationship has survived the first six months without problems, why shouldn't the relationship continue with a mere two months security of tenure?

P.P.

[Rootsey]

Hi All

I seem to remember reading somewhere that a section 21 notice can be issued at the start of an AST. If the tenant turns out to be poor the system is already in place to have the property back, if there ok they can stay on and the section 21 is ignored.

Has any one heard of this, is it standard practice and how is the section 21 cancelled out.

Thanks for any response

[jeffrey]

Hi All

I seem to remember reading somewhere that a section 21 notice can be issued at the start of an AST. If the tenant turns out to be poor the system is already in place to have the property back, if there ok they can stay on and the section 21 is ignored.

Has any one heard of this, is it standard practice and how is the section 21 cancelled out.

Thanks for any response

Notice can be served as early as you like BUT only once the Tenancy has commenced. It is not "cancelled"; L might choose never to enforce it.

[lorenzo]

Hi All

I seem to remember reading somewhere that a section 21 notice can be issued at the start of an AST. If the tenant turns out to be poor the system is already in place to have the property back, if there ok they can stay on and the section 21 is ignored.

Has any one heard of this, is it standard practice and how is the section 21 cancelled out.

Thanks for any response
Bad policy I reckon.

1/The tenant is entitled to move out at the end of the term without notice.

2/If the tenant realizes what it means, they will be extremely pissed.

3/If they have any brains they will be sure to invalidate it, or just move out as per point 1

Hardly a good way to start a good T/LL relationship.

[Paragon]

Best to issue a S21 when you actually intend on enforcing it.

[caroline7758]

Could someone give me a link to the recent discussion on why this is a bad idea, please?

[Paul_f]

It's not necessarily a bad idea but do you really want to end the tenancy after the fixed period? You have plenty of time to serve one as you have up to two months before the end of the fixed term to serve your Notice.

Remember a S.21 Notice served before the start of the tenancy is invalid so wait until is has started. It's no good serving it before the tenant has taken up occupation which is a frequent mistake. The reason is you can't purport to end a tenancy that hasn't even started.

[fallenlord]

Could someone give me a link to the recent discussion on why this is a bad idea, please?

Ive just copied this from letlink.co.uk

Once a section 21(1) notice has been issued it will legally expire at the end of the tenancy. However there are some potential problems with issuing that notice on the same day as the tenancy itself is signed. You cannot issue a valid notice to terminate a tenancy until the tenancy itself has been created. Should you have to go to court to obtain possession then you will have to prove the sequence of events as this will not be apparent on the face of the papers as the date on the tenancy agreement and the notice will be the same. If you do continue to do this then any acknowledgement of service signed by the tenant should clearly indicate that the tenancy is already in existence.

[johnboy]

Also deposit has to be protected before s21 served or s21 invalid

[Jimbotron]

Hello - I have been reading n the RLA website, that RLA recomend that a Section 21 notice is served to accompany the A.S.T. at the begining of the tenancy.
I have a couple of reservations about this, that I would like comment on please.

1, Given that a Section 21 notice would give the tenancy end date the same as the A.S.T. Would this practice prevent the tenancy rolling into a periodic tenancy?

2, Does this take away the right to serve a Section 8 if needed?

Please let me know your thoughts.
Thanks
Jimbotron:)

[Lawcruncher]

1, Given that a Section 21 notice would give the tenancy end date the same as the A.S.T. Would this practice prevent the tenancy rolling into a periodic tenancy?

No.


2, Does this take away the right to serve a Section 8 if needed?

No.

***

A section 21 notice should not be served until after the tenant has taken up occupation. This is because:

1. Until the tenant takes up occupation there is no tenancy.

2. If there is no tenancy there can be no tenant.

3. A section 21 notice needs to be served on a tenant.

[johnboy]

Do not attach s21 to ast if done at start of tenancy. You could just date the s21 the following day after the tenant has moved in.

Or dont do one and at month 4 see if tenant wants to stay on. If not serve s21 then.

[Jimbotron]

Cheers guys thanks a lot.
So no need to wait until month 9.5 of a 12 month agreement to serve the Section 21, it would be best to serve earlier on, just to ensure everyone is clear on when the tenancy will expire?
If the T and LL decided to sign up again for another 12 months, can the AST be completed prior to the end of the existing agreement and post dated with the start date the day after then existing end date.
if that makes sense! :)

[Lawcruncher]

If the T and LL decided to sign up again for another 12 months, can the AST be completed prior to the end of the existing agreement and post dated with the start date the day after then existing end date.

Yes - as long as it is not more than 21 years in the future!

[Pelican eats pigeon]

Another reason not to do this at the start of the tenancy is that the notice will in all likelihood be invalid if you are taking a deposit, as you will probably not have had a chance to protect the deposit yet.

[Ruth Less]

Call me old fashioned but if you serve a S21 on a tenant then there is a good chance they will make arrangements to leave by the time the notice period expires as the S21 informs the tenant that you require possession of the property.

I know the tenant can stay on and wait to see if the landlord is going to action the S21 but I wouldn't do that as I value my good references too much. Also if the landlord does action the S21 then the tenant as the losing party would most likely have to pay the landlord's court fee and I don't fancy hanging around for that to happen.

So an S21 would cause me to start, at about two months before the notice period is due to expire, making arrangements to move as from experince that's how long it takes me to get organised and I don't like a rushed move as I like to pick where I move to carefully.

I take it you will actually want the tenant to leave?

[Mars Mug]

As someone who has been a business tenant I would not have been allowed by my company to accept this sort of arrangement if it was shorter than my intended stay which tends to be 1 year or more, otherwise we use hotels.

[Miss Eck]

Okay, I know the Section 21 Notice would need to be issued 2 months before the AST would come to an end.

But can the Section 21 be issued at the start of the tenancy? My agent has done that with the last letting, however when I worked in lettings quite a few years ago, we used to make a diary note to issue it around 2.5 months before the end of the contract.

Are both ways okay?

I have got rid of my good for nothing agent and dealing with the rental myself so just want to make sure I am fully covered further down the line just in case! The new tenant is due to occupy the property next week.

[Mars Mug]

I'm no expert, and it seems to be largely a matter of opinion, but it appears there are some legalities of timing at the start to consider if attempting to issue the S21 early.

[Miss Eck]

Yes, it sounds like there is. They occupy the property the same day they would be handed the Section 21 Notice, but it would seem more prudent to hold off sending that. I can always send it by registered mail another time ... better be safe than sorry.

I am renting to a solicitor ... I best get it right :p

[stanjan]

Hi

Just looking for a bit of advice please. I signed my 6 month AST and moved in to my current property on the 17th May. At the same time as signing my AST the letting agent also served me with a S21 - is this a normal way of doing things??

I would like to stay in the property but having the s21 served already means that in a few months I should move out. Should I try to contact the landlord direct to explain my situation and that the fact that his LA serves s21 at the start of the tenancy makes the last couple of months difficult as I will really need to start looking elsewhere soon.

thanks

[Ericthelobster]

Just looking for a bit of advice please. I signed my 6 month AST and moved in to my current property on the 17th May. At the same time as signing my AST the letting agent also served me with a S21 - is this a normal way of doing things??

I would like to stay in the property but having the s21 served already means that in a few months I should move out. Should I try to contact the landlord direct to explain my situation and that the fact that his LA serves s21 at the start of the tenancy makes the last couple of months difficult as I will really need to start looking elsewhere soon.It's very much standard practice with agents especially. Basically it means (a) that the landlord and agent are covered against you not working out as a good tenant and can get you out ASAP after the 6 months if need be; but mainly (b) it's so the agent has the excuse/justification to charge another round of fees for preparing a new contract or renewal documentation after the 6 months has expired.

There's been lots of discussion about this on this forum - try searching for "sword of damocles"!

You'll often find that especially if asked under these circumstances, agents/landlords will say 'yes they would hope to renew the tenancy" after 6 months "provided everything works out" etc etc - you at least ought to be able to suss out whether that's the intention or whether they will definitely want you out after 6 months for some reason (eg, landlord moving back in).

[deargas]

Hi,

I just wanted to check if it's legally acceptable to serve a section 21 notice at the commencement of a lease.

I've got tenants moving in at the weekend, and I only want to lease the place out for 6 months. I'll be overseas and want to occupy the property afterwards.

Thanks,

Gus

[Paul Gibbs]

you can serve a s21 at the commencement of the lease, as long as it obviously does not expire earlier than the end of the fixed term.

Bear in mind that the tenants might not actually move out!

[jeffrey]

True, but it's not exactly at the commencement of a lease: Notice under s.21 cannot be served until after the letting has started.

[johnboy]

Make sure the deposit is protected first otherwise it will be invalid.

[deargas]

you mean I have to put the deposit in a deposit protection scheme before i can serve notice.

Do I need to put it in the scheme at the start, or can I do it at any stage of the lease.

[mind the gap]

you mean I have to put the deposit in a deposit protection scheme before i can serve notice.

Do I need to put it in the scheme at the start, or can I do it at any stage of the lease.

You are legally required to protect a tenancy deposit within 14 days of receiving it. You are then required to supply your tenant with the prescribed information relating to the scheme you have used.

Failure to do either of these things means the tenant may sue you for 3x the value of the deposit.

[jbaker]

Hello,

Your thoughts on the following scenerio, which I'm sure is common, would be most grateful:

* An agent issues a short hold tenancy agreement.
* The agent also issues a section 21 at the start of the agreement, requesting the tenant leave after month six.
* Six months pass and the agent issues no new contract, so the standard one month's notice from tenant and two month's notice from landlord is in place (at least, I assume it is!).
* The tenant stays in the property for a further 8 months.

Is the requirement for a tenant to give noticed waived, given the section 21 was issued on day 1?

Thanks.

[jta]

No it's not, the S21 is not a notice to quit. It's bad practice to issue it on the same day as the AST, since it cannot be effective before the end of the fixed six months anyway. If the T had left at the six month period he would not have had to give you any further notice. Since he has gone to a periodic tenancy, he is bound to give you one months notice, to end at the end of a rental period, you have to give him two months notice, same condition.
The only thing the S21 enables you to do is start court proceedings, if you wish.
By not doing so when you had the first chance 8 months ago does not really invalidate it, but it would be best to issue another.

[jeffrey]

Six months pass and the agent issues no new contract, so the standard one month's notice from tenant and two month's notice from landlord is in place (at least, I assume it is!).
Er, no.
Once a fixed-term AST becomes a statutory periodic, all Notice periods in written Agreement become inoperative: s.5(3)(e), underlined below.

(2) If an assured tenancy which is a fixed term tenancy comes to an end otherwise than by virtue of:
(a) an order of the court, or
(b) a surrender or other action on the part of the tenant,
then, subject to section 7 and Chapter II below, the tenant shall be entitled to remain in possession of the dwelling-house let under that tenancy and, subject to subsection (4) below, his right to possession shall depend upon a periodic tenancy arising by virtue of this section.

(3) The periodic tenancy referred to in subsection (2) above is one:
(a) taking effect in possession immediately on the coming to an end of the fixed term tenancy;
(b) deemed to have been granted by the person who was the landlord under the fixed term tenancy immediately before it came to an end to the person who was then the tenant under that tenancy;
(c) under which the premises which are let are the same dwelling-house as was let under the fixed term tenancy;
(d) under which the periods of the tenancy are the same as those for which rent was last payable under the fixed term tenancy; and
(e) under which, subject to the following provisions of this Part of this Act, the other terms are the same as those of the fixed term tenancy immediately before it came to an end, except that any term which makes provision for determination by the landlord or the tenant shall not have effect while the tenancy remains an assured tenancy.

[jbaker]

Jeffrey,

Thanks for your response, but are you stating the tenant does or does not have to give notice?

I see someone else states opinions vary; I guess the reason I'm asking is that I've read various threads on the subject and I'm wondering whether my interpretation is a myth (i.e. has it been tested in court).

Thanks.

[David TFP]

Not mentioned yet is the fact that unless the deposit has been protected and the prescribed information given, then a section 21 notice cannot validly be used anyway. These must be in place the day the notice is served and if not, a new notice would be required.

I would say you are right that on the expiry of the fixed term the "baseline" position of one and two months does prevail (as a general principle.) Jeffery's comment is obviously right two but this would have effect is, for example, the fixed term tenancy included a requirement for the tenant to give two months' notice. Ignoring the legal validity of such a clause within the fixed, Jeffery's point I understand to be that such a clause would not survive becoming periodic.

Section 21 does not run out simply through time and Paddington Churches Housing Association won a case over 3 years after service of the notice.

[jeffrey]

Thanks for your response, but are you stating the tenant does or does not have to give notice?

I see someone else states opinions vary; I guess the reason I'm asking is that I've read various threads on the subject and I'm wondering whether my interpretation is a myth (i.e. has it been tested in court).
T need not give any Notice if vacating on term expiry (although it would be courteous to tell L in advance).
Thereafter, T wishing to vacate can do so only:
a. at the end of a periodic tenancy period (usually, rent month end), since each month's period is indivisible; and
b. by giving L at least one month's advance Notice (common-law rule).

[jbaker]

T need not give any Notice if vacating on term expiry (
b. by giving L at least one month's advance Notice (common-law rule).

Jeffrey,

Thank you for your insight. So it appears the one month's notice does apply. Is this subject to the rules concerning ensuring the month's notice is given on or shortly before the next payment date? Let's assume the payment date is the 10th of every month, and the tenant gives notices on March 12th. Can they leave on April 12th, or does the notice have to run until May 10th?

Thanks.

[jeffrey]

Thank you for your insight. So it appears the one month's notice does apply. Is this subject to the rules concerning ensuring the month's notice is given on or shortly before the next payment date? Let's assume the payment date is the 10th of every month, and the tenant gives notices on March 12th. Can they leave on April 12th, or does the notice have to run until May 10th?
For T to terminate on 12 April is impossible, as that's not a rent month end- nor is 10th of a month (as months run 10th-9th).
T can terminate on 9 May, if Notice to L is served no later than 8 April.

[philhaskell]

Hi - hope you get this five years later on but this seemed to be the most relevant posting.

Do you have the case details you refer to? If you could let me have them (tried google without success) that would be much appreciated.

My problem is the reverse of everyone else's - a friend of mine moved out of her rented property 4 months after receiving an S21 (that was the quickest she could find another suitable property) but the agent (who is also the landlord apparently) said that she was due to give them a full further calendar month's notice as the tenancy had since become periodic as they hadn't "actioned" the S21; the TDS agreed with the agent and hey presto her deposit disappeared just like that! seems really unfair that the LL can action the S21 anytime after serving it but she's supposed to behave like she's just on a normal tenancy

we're going to submit a CC claim (limited costs exposure) to try and reclaim this

thanks anyway

thanks for your time


How very odd you must be

As it happens I had confirmation yesterday evening that lawstudent (and it breaks my heart to say this was actually correct about the recent case regarding S21; apparently possession was granted 3 years after the initial S21(1)b was served. I haven't seen the details of the case or the judges ruling as yet but once I have them I'll post the details up.

Lawstudent, you were right, I was wrong

[nessa]

Hi Guys

Just need a bit of help with the following if that's OK.

Have tenants on an ast started on 16 April, due to end 15 October. A s21 was issued at the start of the tenancy. They were a tenant find from a letting agent. I have posted about my problems with them here before. They are lithuanian, and had 5 people living at the house at one point. Got my local council involved who were great, and who explained to them, in no uncertain terms, that only 2 people should be living there as per the tenancy agreement, therefore the others had to go, and that they would be monitoring them.

Up to this point, the rent had been paid on time throughout. Tenancy agreement states payments by normal standing order on the 16th, letting agent said this was set up, however no rent as yet this month. Called the guarantor this morning who said he would be paying this tomorrow, and that the tenant had been sick, hence the reason for no payment. I said as payment was done by s/o I did not know what difference her being sick would make. Anyhow he kept talking but I did not understand, so I have asked that his English speaking daughter call me today. He unconvicingly said he would arrange this.

My thoughts are that as they others have left, they now cannot afford the rent, despite both tenants have well paid jobs.

Anyhow, I am now fed up with them, and if I do not hear from them by tomorrow evening I am going to ask them to leave.

Can you advise whether I can still use the original s21 from the start of the tenancy? To give them 2 months notice in writing now, posting the letter Wednesday 25th would be, say, 27th October (to allow for postage time)- not the 15th October as on the s21?

Many thanks for any help

Nessa

[David TFP]

You can certainly ask them to leave and try to negotiate a surrender (best evidenced in writing.

You say a section 21 notice was given at the outset. You need to make sure that the deposit protection legislation was complied with before the notice was served on the tenants, if not, the notice will not be valid and does not become valid by later protecting the deposit. It would have to be reserved.

You could reserve the section 21 notice and it does not matter that it run to a few days after the fixed term ends.

Your other option would be to consider using a section 8 notice on the basis of rent arrears and possibly late payment (or any other breaches of the tenancy). However, if you have a guarantor worth anything, then you should get paid and so you should not be in any hurry to resolve this.

[nessa]

Thanks for your reply David.

Yes the deposit protection was all done properly.

I will obviously give them until tomorrow evening to resolve this, because they have, up to this point, been fine - well apart from the extra 3/4 people in the property!!!. Its the s/o bit that makes me suspicious. Have they cancelled it? Did they ever use it? If not, why not?

I am not sure I understand what you mean by 'reserve the s21 notice'? I take it you mean that it is still valid, but I would have to change the expiry date on it to 27 October?

[thesaint]

What do you mean by you "Using the original s21 from the start of the tenancy?".

[nessa]

The original s21 was the s21 was issued to them at the start of the tenancy dated to expire the 15 October. This has been the only one issued thus far.

Do I therefore have to issue another one as the current, and only s21, is dated 15 October, and therefore not giving them 2 months notice?

[thesaint]

The original s21 was the s21 was issued to them at the start of the tenancy dated to expire the 15 October. This has been the only one issued thus far.

Do I therefore have to issue another one as the current, and only s21, is dated 15 October, and therefore not giving them 2 months notice?

What date was the Sec 21 issued?
Do you have proof?
Was a deposit taken?
When was that protected?
When did the tenant receive the "prescribed information" regarding the deposit?

[nessa]

What date was the Sec 21 issued? 16 April (teants signed to say signed after ast)
Do you have proof? Have signed copy of s21
Was a deposit taken? yes
When was that protected? 16 April
When did the tenant receive the "prescribed information" regarding the deposit? yes

[David TFP]

The Saint asked WHEN was the prescribed info given to the tenant?

[nessa]

16 April - the same day of the tenancy agreement

[David TFP]

The point we are looking at here is the requirement for the prescribed information to have been give and the "initial requirements of the scheme" to have been complied with before the section 21 notice can be validly served.

This can be very fine, for example, if it was put in the custodial scheme, had it been registered on The DPS web site and had the money been sent off? Difficult things to prove in some cases.

You will have to decide if you think it will stand up, and trust the tenant won't raise any issues, or to re-serve the notice (I.E. issue a new one) as a precautionary measure. The trouble is that if you wait to the end of the fixed term then get it thrown out by the court you may then have to start serving a fresh section 21 with further delay and costs.

Try and avoid court and negotiate a settlement.

[jeffrey]

L cannot serve T under s,21 unless and until the AST has started. Notice served before then is invalid.

[nessa]

s21 was served after the start of the tenancy.

The deposit has been treated correctly - I have proof it was lodged with the dps (the email confirmation from the dps).

Is it just easier to re-issue another s21 in 2 days time, if the tenant still fails to pay?

[jeffrey]

Again: s.21 has nothing to do with unpaid rent. Instead, simply serve T under s.8 on grounds 8/10/11 so far as applicable. See the last bit of post #2.

[nessa]

Don't have enough arrears I don't think to go for a s8. As soon as I have I will, but I just wanted to cover myself with a s21 too.

[David TFP]

Don't have enough arrears I don't think to go for a s8. As soon as I have I will, but I just wanted to cover myself with a s21 too.

Section 8 notices can be used the minute there is any rent arrears (ground 10) and the "enough" rent arrears refers to ground 8. It is easy to confuse section 8 and ground 8.

[thesaint]

Don't have enough arrears I don't think to go for a s8. As soon as I have I will, but I just wanted to cover myself with a s21 too.

You seemingly have issued the Sec 21 correctly.

If you are not asking for arrears to be paid, there is no point in detailing late rent, short rent, housing benefit etc etc.

[nessa]

I know but s8 ground 10 is discretionary, and possession can be extended if granted anyhow. I am unsure to how successful i will be if I go down this path?

[jeffrey]

Section 8 notices can be used the minute there is any rent arrears (ground 10) and the "enough" rent arrears refers to ground 8. It is easy to confuse section 8 and ground 8.
Not quite. If rent is payable weekly/fortnightly/monthly, "arrears" is irrelevant- focus instead on the rent unpaid, as that's quite different.

[Snorkerz]

Nessa, your original S21 seems valid, providing you can prove to the courts satisfaction that...

The s21 was issued AFTER the current tenancy agreement was signed
The s21 was issued AFTER the deposit was protected
The s21 was issued AFTER the prescribed information was given

[nessa]

Many, many thanks Snorkerz.

So even if I dont send a letter saying I want to end the tenancy when the tenancy term finishes until say this Wednesday the 25th, containing a copy of the s21 given at the start of the tenancy, I can still ask them to leave on the 15 October, provided I can prove all you have mentioned?

[thesaint]

Many, many thanks Snorkerz.

So even if I dont send a letter saying I want to end the tenancy when the tenancy term finishes until say this Wednesday the 25th, containing a copy of the s21 given at the start of the tenancy, I can still ask them to leave on the 15 October, provided I can prove all you have mentioned?

You don't need to do anything else, but I would send them a letter with the copy of the Sec 21(get proof of posting) stating your intentions.

Although legal, a Sec 21 at the start of tenancy does not tell a tenant that you will be ending their fixed term.

[Moderator1]

Several largely similar questions on separate threads have been merged into this thread (hence the repetitive nature of answers).