Opinions please - how do I deal with this, do I need a solicitor?

Maddie

Hi all,

I entered into a 12m contract to rent a house in May 08. We then needed to move to a different city and moved out in Oct 08. The landlord said this was fine if we found replacement tenants.

We found several interested parties, but didn't manage to get anyone in. This was due to several issues including the fact that the landlord and estate agents messed around until the applicants got fed up, and that the landlord took up the kitchen floor to repair then left the mouldy floorboards exposed for weeks (supposedly to dry out but it took longer than needed).

We then had to give up with our attempts to find tenants given that we were getting married in Dec and had no spare time.

We moved out on 20th Oct but paid rent up until the end of Dec 08, as I didn't want to stop paying and get into an arguement until we found somewhere else to live (were living with my parents in the mean time).

From my understanding, as I broke the contract I am liable to refund the landlords losses. However, for this to apply they need to mitigate these losses, by making attempts to fill the property. I said this to the landlord and he said if I didn't fill it he would leave it empty until May and make me pay for it.

I have not had any contact with the landlord since this all happened other than one letter from their solicitor (I can't remember exactly what it said but it wasn't much).

They now (in theory) owe me the excess rent paid and my deposit.

I'm pretty sure they didn't put our deposit in a deposit protection scheme (we never got a letter and it would surprise me if they had done this as pretty slack). Therefore apparently I can get a standard 3x my deposit off them.

I'm not sure how I should proceed, both in legal terms and morally.

Morally, in one sense, yes it was us who broke the contract so perhaps we should loose out to some extent, but they did not help at all in our attempts to find replacements and were terrible landlords.

I had thought maybe I should write and say please give back my deposit and you can have the excess rent so long as you agree this is full and final settlement, then if they refuse, go in for the whole lot plus 3 x deposit.

My husband however thinks we need to speak to a solicitor and deal with it properly. I'm worried that this will cost a fortune and I could do as well myself with help from this site and my employers legal helpline (other than perhaps the solicitor would actually get it done instead of just worrying about it!)

Any advice is most appreciated.

Maddy

Gwhiz

I think you'll find you owe the LL money. Unless the LL does get a tenant (regardless of the attempts) I believe you are still liable for the rent to the end of the 12 months. At the end of the day YOU are in breach of contract!

hearts

QUOTE: "They now (in theory) owe me the excess rent paid and my deposit."

How come? You had a contract for 1 year. He is under no obligation to do anything.

N79

Maddie wrote: »

From my understanding, as I broke the contract I am liable to refund the landlords losses. However, for this to apply they need to mitigate these losses, by making attempts to fill the property. I said this to the landlord and he said if I didn't fill it he would leave it empty until May and make me pay for it.

You think wrong. LL does not have to mitigate losses. You owe your LL rent until the end of your fixed term or when new Ts take over the property - whichever is sooner.

N79

Maddie wrote: »

I'm pretty sure they didn't put our deposit in a deposit protection scheme (we never got a letter and it would surprise me if they had done this as pretty slack). Therefore apparently I can get a standard 3x my deposit off them.

If the LL protects the deposit or refunds prior to a court hearing the changes are that you will not get the 3x award (this seems to be the way that, on average, the legislation is being interpreted - you may be lucky of course).

I do not understand why you feel the LL owes you any refund of rent - quite the contrary - you owe them rent from Dec to May.

My suggestion would be that you pay the LL the outstanding rent plus less the deposit which the LL holds (provided you left the property in such a manner that they LL has no further legitimate deductions from the deposit).

Maddie

Thanks for replies so far. I am now at work so will reply later.

Cheers

Maddy

Maddie

N79 wrote: »

You think wrong. LL does not have to mitigate losses. You owe your LL rent until the end of your fixed term or when new Ts take over the property - whichever is sooner.

Is this not basic contract law? I am by no means an expect so could be mistaken, but a search on google brought up this from gillhams.com;

A claimant must take reasonable steps to mitigate loss. Claimants are not entitled to recover those damages represented by sums that are avoidable by taking reasonable steps. If the claimant has failed to take reasonable steps to avoid particular losses, the claimant is not entitled in law to recover them, as they are not entitled to profit from their own neglect. This neglect may take of the form of either failing to take action reasonable steps or allowing an act to continue that would have increases loss.

I would say that making some sort of effort to find a new tenant is a reasonable step that my landlord could have taken and didn't.

Doozergirl

Maddie wrote: »

Is this not basic contract law? I am by no means an expect so could be mistaken, but a search on google brought up this from gillhams.com;

I would say that making some sort of effort to find a new tenant is a reasonable step that my landlord could have taken and didn't.

I think you're right there. They do have to mitigate your losses and simply leaving the house empty until May not doing that. It shouldn't take 5 months to find a tenant although you would be responsible for the cost of the empty period and the cost of finding those tenants - the cost to a Landlord from a letting agent of finding a tenant works out at pretty much an entire month's rent; hence two months extra money and the deposit might be a reasonable amount if he were actively trying to find tenants.

I'd be more inclined to defend yourself against claims that you still owe rent than I would be in chasing down my deposit money. I think that's gone.

hearts

Doozergirl wrote: »

I think you're right there. They do have to mitigate your losses and simply leaving the house empty until May not doing that. It shouldn't take 5 months to find a tenant although you would be responsible for the cost of the empty period and the cost of finding those tenants - the cost to a Landlord from a letting agent of finding a tenant works out at pretty much an entire month's rent; hence two months extra money and the deposit might be a reasonable amount if he were actively trying to find tenants.

I'd be more inclined to defend yourself against claims that you still owe rent than I would be in chasing down my deposit money. I think that's gone.

This may or may not be right. I think you would find it hard to prove they were not actively seeking to get new tenants.

clutton_2

i think the heart of this problem is

""We then had to give up with our attempts to find tenants given that we were getting married in Dec and had no spare time."

you broke your contract for 12 months - you failed to find new tenants, your landlord was doing repairs to the property - thats what landlords need to do in between tenants

you owe him rent

he does not owe you rent-money

if he had not protected your deposit that is an entirely separate matter and you may want to negotiate with him in writing as to his keeping the deposit to go some way to mitigate his loss of having had no rent since October when he was expecting rent till May

tbs624

Maddie wrote: »

Is this not basic contract law? I am by no means an expect so could be mistaken, but a search on google ............I would say that making some sort of effort to find a new tenant is a reasonable step that my landlord could have taken and didn't.

The duty to mitigate is not absolute - if you like to check your legal position merely by Googling have a look for Reichmann & Dunn v Gauntlett & Beveridge, Court of Appeal Dec 2006. It involved a commercial tenancy but it makes for interesting reading.

What I find so ironic is the number of tenants who seek to renege on a Fixed Term contract and then start making bold statements on the basics of contract law and what the other party's failings are.

You say that "morally we broke the contract" but actually you breached the terms of your contract in the eyes of *the law*. Any replacement T has to be acceptable to the LL and this means passing any relevant checks. The LL trying to dry out "mouldy" floorboards is surely the LL seeing to his repairing obligations? It *does* sometimes take longer for damp areas to dry out - the LL can't help that.

However, if you paid your deposit after 6 April 2007 and you are in Eng/Wales then your LL should have scheme-registered your deposit and given you the prescribed information. Before you go down that track check for yourselves here and get confirmation one way or another in writing.

You *may* then have some bargaining power, if it turns out the LL has not fulfilled his appropriate legal obligations regarding the deposit. You need to bear in mind that the LL can register the deposit at a late stage and still avoid being penalised and that your own stance on contractual obligations does not put you in a good light.