Tenants Leaving Agreement Early

prudryden

If they signed an agreement to pay rent for 12 months and there was no break clause in the agreement - then so be it, the rent is legally due for the next 12 months. You can attempt to attach their earnings, if they don't pay and if they work. I would ask a lawyer to draft a letter for you as you do not want to say anything in writing that may compromise your position.

leespot

Thanks prudryden - I really want to defer from the court proceedings, there was no break clause in the agreement. I would be happy with just another month or so for me to sort tenants out properly. I think that is reasonable?

speedtwin

prudryden wrote: »

If they signed an agreement to pay rent for 12 months and there was no break clause in the agreement - then so be it, the rent is legally due for the next 12 months. You can attempt to attach their earnings, if they don't pay and if they work. I would ask a lawyer to draft a letter for you as you do not want to say anything in writing that may compromise your position.

prudryden has summed it up nicely. The tenants are over 21 they have signed a contract and therefore liable for the rent until new tenants are found.

No ifs or buts.

If you decide to release them early that is your choice.

There are too many people out who think they can walk away from their legal obligations (landlords and tenants)

leespot

Hi Incisor, thanks again - I understand what you were saying now.

When they moved in I offered the 6 month AST to them, basically to make sure they were comfortable in the house (they are not quite pensioners yet, late 50's early 60's) and they were happy with that. Just before the AST was up for renewal, they asked for a 12 month agreement, which they got.

The only part that confused me is the fact that within just over 2 working weeks of the new agreement, they had confirmation of availability of a newly built housing association property (still not quite finished). I think they had been looking for somewhere else before I gave them the new agreement, but wanted to cover themselves (rather than them being scared of being booted out, which isn't the case!) I'd not boot anyone out to be fair, they have paid on time every month since moving in, but I really do think they knew about the new place before 1st Nov.

leespot

Yes, I can understand them wanting to protect themselves. In a nutshell, their previous landlord upped their rent from £495, to £550, then £595 within a 6 month period - all without any modification to the property / proper written notice etc. My house was nearing completion, and they approached me about it via mutual friends. I offered it at £495 which is a fair rent for the property (all rennovated etc).

They were made up, kept saying how happy they were and asking for reassurance that I wouldn't put the rent up (which I said I wouldn't) and I genuinely have no desire to. They also asked for reassurance that I wouldn't be selling / ending the agreement, hence where the conversation regarding the new 12mth AST comes into place. I genuinely, and maybe naively, thought I was doing them a favour! It all adds to the experience, but hopefully they will agree with staying on for just another month or so.

Thanks again for your input, appreciate it.

leespot

Just a quick update for anyone following the thread!

I contacted the tenants today, via phone initially. I politley reminded them that as they had agreed to a new 12mth AST, that they are not able to just end it when they would like. I suggested that they stay in the property until 19th January, paying the agreed rent. I also suggested that for their peace of mind, they could take the agreement along to their local CAB for confirmation that what I was saying is correct.

This basically went down like a lead balloon, they went on to say that they had paid deposit on new place, bought new carpets, new 37" LCD Tv and that if I wanted any money I would get it when they could pay it (assuming what I told them is correct).

They said they couldn't pay me any more rent as they were "broke" with it being Christmas etc etc. I explained (still very politlely!) that I understand that they may be low on money given the time of year, but that they still have to meet certain obligations under the AST they have signed with me. I also explained that I really don't want to enforce anything within the agreement unless all other negotiations fail.

The guy said he would speak to his wife and then get back to me. To confirm my situation, I have typed a letter ready to be sent tomorrow via recorded signed for mail.

poppysarah

You could waste a lot of energy on chasing them for the cash - good luck with finding new tenants quickly though.

leespot

poppysarah, thanks. You've mentioned twice now that I should concentrate on getting new tenants. You seem to missing my issue here. My problem is that they ended a 12mth AST less than 3 weeks into it. This then left me with the issue of getting a tenant to move in on 19th Dec or thereabouts.

I am advertising the house, and I've had several people look at it over the last two weeks. Ovbiously out of the people that have looked, the interested ones have said the timing is an issue for them.

I won't be chasing for anything that isn't owed - and I think for them to pay rent for at least one more month is very fair. Chasing is probably the wrong word to use to be honest. If every tenant treated their landlords in this way, I expect the rental market would be up the wall.

There is also the issue that one of them works part time, the other is on full benefits (including disabililty) and also manages to work "on the side" I think is the phrase people use. Each to their own is the way I live my life, but I won't suffer fools gladly.

poppysarah

OK take them to the smal claims court for the amount of rent you'll lose from when they leave to when you find new tenants or until the end of their AST.
If they are moving to a council place then they have only the tat they own as possessions for the bailiffs to come and get. You might be able to get an attachment of earnings for them until they lose their jobs after Christmas.
Or you could be cross, tell them you want an extra months rent in lieu of them finishing their tenancy.
Of course there's the chance in court they would turn up and say you made them sign a new AST and they didn't understand that you couldn't evict them if they didn't and that they thought it was just continuing the one they'd already signed.
They may get critised by the judge for signing something they didn't understand or read properly, but it doesn't guarantee you all the cash you could get.
did you say you'd already started marketing it before they'd signed a new tenancy? They only have to mention that and say they signed the contract under durress and I suspect the judge might say it's null and void.
They wlll see CAB advice when they get the papers to court.

Yes in theory they should turn over more money to you. But you've got a couple of weeks before xmas to arrange new tenants and then you'd have a very legitimate claim for about a months rent - which should be about as much as their deposit?

Positive action could solve your problem very quickly.

leespot

Are you a landlord who has been stung in the past, or a tenant who has done the same thing as mine are doing to me?

Positive action - and as I've said for the 3rd and last time, that is what I am trying to do, get new tenants in.

With regards to the AST, I left it with them to have it checked and make sure they were happy. They were, they signed. End of that.

No I didn't say I'd started marketing it before the signed, I put the "To Let" sign in the window the weekend after they informed me that that they would be leaving (so about two weeks ago).

CAB advice is given well before it gets to court.

They didn't pay a deposit. (my fault, but even if I had deposit, doesn't mean I would be entitled to keep it without a fight).

Positive action, yes again, you are right. Positive action could mean me biting the bullet and accept that being walked all over is part of being a landlord. It could also mean reporting him for benefit fraud, which in turn is positive as it helps reduce the number of spongers - agree?