What happens at the end of an Assured Shorthold Tenancy please?

prudryden · 11 June 2007 at 10:27AM

I'm a list person - please put me on a list, as long as the gov't of the people, by the people, and for the people says the subject of the list is legal and, therefore by deduction, in the best interest of the people.

peachespeaches · 11 June 2007 at 12:32PM

Cant believe what this thread has turned into!

I have spoken to the Estate Agent and they do automatically serve a section 21 but she the agent also says that this landlady prefers long term tenants; has got several long term tenants; and would probably do a 12 month tenancy if we preferred it. I said leave it as it is as obviously I want to suss out the landlady and the house. Should I have gone for 12 months?

olly300 · 11 June 2007 at 12:46PM

peachespeaches wrote: »

Cant believe what this thread has turned into!

. Should I have gone for 12 months?

Nope. The LL could be horrible or you may want to leave.

franklee · 11 June 2007 at 4:35PM

thesaint wrote: »

I did ask (2 questions?) about the proposed new legislation, but this was at the end of the thread.

Are you saying that these questions of yours are about the NEW legislation?

thesaint wrote: »

You wouldn't be at square one would you, if the law only allowed for a correct serving to be deemed correct if it contained a signature of receipt then no one would get evicted surely?

Really? :rotfl:

And this?

thesaint wrote: »

I think that this has come full circle, You would have 4 months to issue an S21, how would you be covered better than I if I issue at 4 months?

ALL the new legislation? :rotfl:

Odd as it wasn't mentioned in the thread till here:

franklee wrote: »

Well I can agree with that! Although I would add educating tenants on this matter to the list. I know little about the proposed new legislation but I think they are looking at "if you don't use it you lose it" for this notice. I think they are looking at a six months valid time.

Still if you were talking about the new legislation back then you should have said. I'm pretty sure Bob wasn't for the above questions and I certainly wasn't till later on. :rotfl:

franklee · 11 June 2007 at 5:48PM

peachespeaches wrote: »

Cant believe what this thread has turned into!

I have spoken to the Estate Agent and they do automatically serve a section 21 but she the agent also says that this landlady prefers long term tenants; has got several long term tenants; and would probably do a 12 month tenancy if we preferred it. I said leave it as it is as obviously I want to suss out the landlady and the house. Should I have gone for 12 months?

Oh bad luck. Best thing for you to do is make sure you understand exactly what the S21 means. In addition WHEN it is is given to you ask again if it means you'll have to leave in six months. Make a note of the answer and ask the agent to confirm in writing too. Chances are the answer will invalidate the S21 and give you something to keep up your sleeve should you need it.

Later on make sure any renewal is agreed in plenty of time such that you'll have time to arrange a move if it turns out you need to.

The horrible thing about this automatically serving a section 21 is that it leaves you in a vulnerable position at the end of the fixed term if no renewal has been agreed. Without the S21 you would be fine staying on a periodic tenancy even if the agent/landlord do nothing.

Because you will be in a vulnerable position it means the agent can get away with charging you renewal fees, putting the rent up or changes to the terms of the tenancy.

Don't take important things the agent says on trust. If they won't put confirmation in writing then do it yourself and send it to them. You may not need any of this but at least you will have something in writing should anything go wrong later on, which hopefully it won't

Don't worry about the spat here but on the other hand the thread we've been referring to is an informative one. So it's well worth reading IMO. It's this one:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=366877

PS: To be valid the S21 needs to be served AFTER the tenancy has started so make a note of when it is given to you in relation to your and the LL signing the contact and being given the keys.

thesaint · 11 June 2007 at 7:32PM

franklee wrote: »

Are you saying that these questions of yours are about the NEW legislation
<snipped all the superfluous claptrap>

Originally Posted by thesaint
You wouldn't be at square one would you, if the law only allowed for a correct serving to be deemed correct if it contained a signature of receipt then no one would get evicted surely?

You said that I had "Many" questions, you picked out two.

Do you exaggerate about everything?

To make it worse, out of the "many" questions this was about the misconception about the correct serving of (any)notices, it wasn't a question about the S.O.D.

The rest of your waffle is of a similar nature.

franklee for the love of God, I beg you please stop spending your time finding links and mis-quoting me and re-read the thread.

The joker

Mrs_pbradley936 · 11 June 2007 at 7:51PM

peachespeaches wrote: »

Cant believe what this thread has turned into!

Neither can I. They should both know better than to squabble on a thread where clearly a poster has asked for help and advice. They should PM each other if they wish to bicker.

prudryden · 11 June 2007 at 11:46PM

Mrs_pbradley936 wrote: »

Neither can I. They should both know better than to squabble on a thread where clearly a poster has asked for help and advice. They should PM each other if they wish to bicker.

It just won't happen. Franklee is our knight - the protector of the innocent, the poor and the downtroden - the sword that smites down inequality. He often makes sense in other words.

franklee · 12 June 2007 at 12:08AM

prudryden wrote: »

It just won't happen. Franklee is our knight - the protector of the innocent, the poor and the downtroden - the sword that smites down inequality. He often makes sense in other words.

Cheers Pru :beer: I do try to stick up for tenants rights

. And I am really thankful that there is a landlord like Gorgeous George on here who said the SoD is a deplorable and wholly unnecessary way to do business. Of course there is your goodself, who doesn't use the SoD either IIRC, but hasn't condemed it yet

.

I really hope it all works out for peachespeaches and that her agent's use of SoD isn't indicative of the way they conduct the rest of their business. When choosing a property a tenant really needs to consider what the landlord/agent is like too as that can make a big difference to how smoothly the tenancy runs. I suppose it's really a case of prepare for the worst but expect the best.

PS peachespeaches that means paying attention to checking the inventory too, but I expect you know that already.

thesaint · 12 June 2007 at 9:12AM

Mrs_pbradley936 wrote: »

Neither can I. They should both know better than to squabble on a thread where clearly a poster has asked for help and advice. They should PM each other if they wish to bicker.

I do see your frustration, but I feel that when someone posts something in the public domain that it should be sorted out in the same fashion.

I originally asked to clarify a statement that I believe to be sweeping and in bad nature.

I was said to have made statements that I clearly hadn't and as such I felt that I needed to 'clear' my name. If this had been carried out by PM, I would have not shown my displeasure, and for those that didn't read the aformentioned thread would believe that I did say the things that was alleged.

What happens at the end of an Assured Shorthold Tenancy please?

Comments

Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

🚀 Getting Started

Categories

Is this how you want to be seen?

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free