I think I already know the answer to this (on the basis of commonsense) but thought I'd ask anyway - in case commonsense and the law are at odds (won't be the first time ).
I am in the process of selling one of my properties and am expectng to complete by the 29th April.
My buyers are a lovely young couple that are currently renting and they have a 12 months ast which was taken out last june which was due to expire on the 20th June 2005.
After being asked what their plans were (and saying that they would be expecting to move on at the end of the tenancy) they were given notice to quit (section 21 I believe) around Christmas time with a expiry date which takes them to the end of their tenancy in June.
Obviously if they could leave earlier without penalty it would help them financially (as otherwise they will be paying rent for their old property as well as the mortgage for their purchase from me).
As they are still within the original term can I assume that, regardless of the fact they have been served with a notice to quit, they are tied to the original term?
I believe that when they enquired they were told by the Landlord that the property is to be sold but the buyers are unable to move before July so there is no chance of them being able to leave sooner.
Sorry this so sketchy, I am just trying to help them if possible and am a little worried that the landlord is spinning them a yarn about not being able to mitigate any losses (this is a very popular student area of Newcastle Upon Tyne and I would expect the last thing a landlord needs is a void at this time of year so I can understand their viewpoint completely).
Any viewpoints would be gratefully received