Can anyone advise?Tenants given 1 months notice after Section 21 has been served.

[Hannah]

Hi everybody,

I have posted regarding this situation before.

In a nutshell, in 2003 I gave a tenancy to 5 people for a flat, we mutually agreed to included a clause that allowed for a tenant to find a replacement agreeable to the other occupants, with suitable references, should one of the group wish to move out. They were to advise me before this happened.

Three of the tenants have since moved out and found replacements, but did not advise of this. I asked the remaining two tenants to ask the three occupants to supply me with references so I could offer them a new Assured Shorthold Tenancy. I did not receive reference forms and decided that the best course of action would be to serve them with a Section 21. I then spoke to the two tenants and said that if the existing tenants and occupants wish to apply for a tenancy, the occupants need to submit referencing forms giving information covering 3 years, with email address for contacts not in the UK. Subject to satisfactory references a new tenancy can be drawn up.

I received referencing forms from the occupants, but have just received one months notice from the original two tenants, telling me that one of the occupants will be moving out as well.

Am I within my rights therefore to expect vacant occupation within a month?

Thanks for your advice and experience, it is greatly appreciated.

[Paul_f]

Only one tenant needs to give you notice of vacation for the tenancy to end, so you're right in that the AST comes to an end and the other tenants have to make alternative arrangements or to ask you for a new AST [make sure they ask and you don't offer].

This circumvents your having to agree to a new tenancy before all the current occupants are referenced. It might concentrate their minds!

The fact that the bona fide tenants have vacated and others have replaced them should not affect your possession rights as this is a clear breach, UNLESS you have taken rent directly from them which could mean you have acepted their status.

You might have to use a bit of bluff but my first paragraph holds good otherwise. You should never have agreed to your allowing tenants to be replaced as this fashion in the first place as every time a tenant leaves you MUST draw up a new AST for it to be binding.