Question about Assured Tenancy Agreement

mlz1413

Discocat if you want long term assurances it might be worth looking into if a tenant would sign up for 12 months, long term renters may jump at this as it means the rents are fixed for longer periods. Or check agents that do guarnteed rents, you get a low price and you really need to ensure you trust the agent and understand the contract but it may give you more peace of mind overall.

tbs624

franklee wrote: »

If a landlord wants to keep a tenant (that they have observed to be a good one) then why does it matter to the landlord if it's a new fixed term or periodic.

It matters because a Fixed Term can only be brought to an end by breach or by agreement and under a periodic, as you know, a tenant can give month's notice. Some LLs prefer to have the added security of a new FT, rather than worrying about a potential tenancy void.

franklee wrote: »

Why not just ask what the tenant would prefer? That way they are more likely to stay.

My own preference is for LLs and Ts to be able to discuss the finer points of a renewal/periodic directly: others choose to do it differently. Some tenants themselves prefer the added security of a new FT, and indeed will move on elsewhere if one is not offered: some tenants like the idea that they can give one month's notice & go, but that doesn't always suit the LL.

franklee wrote: »

Serving S21 notices to impose a new fixed term seems like a good way to !!!! the tenant off and make them leave. Besides there is doubt that a S21 remains valid if the landlord is offering to negotiate an extension. I think an S21 is best only served when the landlord has decided he wants the tenant to vacate. This cry wolf over S21's only serves to train tenants to ignore them making life harder for the genuine landlord who wants a tenant to leave.

Franklee, you know that a LL *has* to have first served a S21before trying to regain possession of a property. Some tenants who are approaching the end of the original FT do mess LLs about.

You have said you are a tenant yourself but you can surely recognise that both parties to the contract have rights & needs according to their own circumstances.

A LL has as much right to say that they only want tenants on FT contracts as a tenant has to choose to seek out a LL who is happy, upon expiry of the original FT, to go with periodic contracts that continue for a considerable length of time.

IMO it's unfortunate that the fact that LAs try to slam both LL & T for renewals fees adds to the issue - many T's would probably sign up for a further 6 months is they weren't presented with a bill for agreeing to do so.(let's remember - there can be no rent increase within that fixed term)

In the OP's case as the T is leaving they clearly do not want to have a new FT nor an extended stay under a periodic contract, so serving a S21 is not "crying wolf", it's the LL complying with the legal necessities around re-possession.

Incisor

Discocat wrote: »

Thanks, Incisor. On reflection I think you're absolutely right.

You still have a problem with the agent though - and getting the communications working there is essential to minimising change of tenancy voids. I don't know what to suggest, apart from a change of agent.