AST Renewal & s.21 Notcie

[Edman]

is an email sufficiently "written request" for LL name and address?

[Edman]

"The landlord would not be willing to allow a statutory periodic tenancy to arise because under common law the notice period to quit would then be one month.

This effectively means that should you wish to do so, you would be able to terminate the tenancy after one month from the last rent due date, with the appropriate notice. This potentially means that the property could become vacant out of season, meaning a significant risk of a void period for the landlord.

This is a risk that the landlord is not willing to accept, which is why he is only willing to agree to a new, fixed term, Assured Shorthold Tenancy. A new s21 notice will be issued in conjunction with this, for the end date of the newly agreed term in exactly the same way that it was for your initial agreement."

This email from the LA kind of sums it up i suppose! even though they say that they let to professionals such as we are - they still have all their eggs in the student market!
Could someone please reassure me that this is all legal and above board and that it is not just another bullying tactic.

[jjlandlord]

Could someone please reassure me that this is all legal and above board and that it is not just another bullying tactic.

This is a legal and above board bullying tactic, imo.


One detail: "The landlord would not be willing to allow a statutory periodic tenancy to arise because under common law the notice period to quit would then be one month."

Note that the landlord cannot 'allow' or disallow the SPT. It will automatically arise at the expiry of the fixed term tenancy if you do not vacate.
The only thing they can do if they do not like it is to actually evict you, which might not be the most reasonable thing to do.

[Paul_f]

is an email sufficiently "written request" for LL name and address?

I would write a letter as the legislation does not cover e-mails specifically.

[Edman]

thank you all for your comments (and may they keep coming if there is something new to add), i think we are going to decide whether we are prepared to pay the £200 fees (LA for renewal) and lack of long term security (ie they will ask us a couple of months into tenancy whether we want to renew again or they will advertise/market the flat) or just walk away.

[thesaint]

Just to put you right, the agent has no rights to show anybody around the property whilst you are bona fide tenants and they need your express permsission to do so. Neither the agent nor your landlord has any right of entry so if they are doing this without your permission you can change the locks and charge it to the landlord by deducting the money from your rent.

Nearly all of this is incorrect.

[Edman]

thesaint - is everything else discussed in this thread correct? IE can they 'force' us into a new fixed term? if we were to stay past the expiration and they went to all the trouble and exense of a court order - would we be required to foot that bill? I suspect the s.21 notice is invalid but i presume they would just serve a new one and have us out in due course - no long term security as i would like anyway?

There is a claus in our current agreement saying that (i forget the actaul wording and don't have it to hand) it is at the LL's discretiion as to whether he would let us move out prior to the end of the fixed term and we would be liable for 'reasaonable' fees associated with the re-renting of the property. Within the claus (i will find it and post wording tonight) there are lots of ambigious 'might's' and 'maybes' and 'certain conditions' etc so surely this would be difficult to enforce?

[Snorkerz]

You can not be forced into a new contract. If you ae still in situ the day after the fixed term ends, you have an SPT, whether the landlord likes it or not. If you sign a new contract, you and the landlord get security, if you don't, you and the landlord get flexibility.

If you sign a new contract and the agency start sending viewers around, I would write to them explaiing that this is a breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment and that until you give notice to leave you will only allow visits for maintenance and reasonable visits for the landlord/agent to view the condition of the property.

If the landlord does start eviction proceedings, the fees are not automatically awarded against the tenant. Although others disagree, I think it is wrong for landlords to expect tenants to pay for making the landlord follow the law! If it does come to a court issue (fee £175) when you get the paperwork, you get a chance to defend on paper (there is rarely a court hearing). As well as whatever info you get late about the s21 validity, I would include an argument to the judge as to why you should not pay the fees. If an order is given and the landlord has to employ bailiffs - then imho it is right that tenants pay for those. If the s21 is invalid, the judge is not goint to award against you.

Just to clarify the points paul_f/thesaint made. You can change the lock (easy and cheap - see youtube) but you can not charge the landlord, and youmust replace the original lock (landlords property) at the end of the tenancy.

[jjlandlord]

If the landlord does start eviction proceedings, the fees are not automatically awarded against the tenant. Although others disagree, I think it is wrong for landlords to expect tenants to pay for making the landlord follow the law!

If the landlord goes to court it is because he is forced to do so by the tenant...

and you must replace the original lock (landlords property) at the end of the tenancy.

Indeed, this is best to avoid trouble with landlord claiming that he had extra spare keys which he must replace.

[Edman]

Is this a legal and viable outcome...

we wait until the expiration of the current fixed term AST (01/08/12) without signing a new fixed term agreement. Then, obviously we enter a SPT automatically. I beleive the s.21 notice already served to be invalid due to it stateing the date of re-posession to be "at midnight on 01/08/12" rather than "after 01/08/12". so then does the landlord just serve a new s.21 notice to us? I thought i read somewhere that the court will not grant a re-possession order unless there was a certain reason? there were 17 different reasons why a londlord could start eviction proceedings. Do these only count during a SPT rather than the s.21 notice for a Fixed Term AST? therefore once the current s.21 notice is found to be invalid we are then in a legitamate SPT and the landlord will need to prove one of te reasons as to why he wants us out? Obviously we pay the rent on time and we have not/will not damage the property or breach any other agreement claus. Or is a s.21 notice generally held that the court will grant a re-possession order (so long as s.21 notice is valid)?