When do you move out when served notice?

Doooford

Please share your knowledge.
We have been served notice, I think it's section 21. We are 8 months into a 12 month fixed term, but the Landlords break clause stated that after 6 months we can be given a 2 month notice period. Now the notice was due to his own circumstances, not ours.
So although we have just had a baby we have managed to go out and find somewhere quickly, and have agreed to move in on a date that is one month into our 2 month notice period. Now he has given us a compromise on the rent, where we will only pay for 1 week after we move out, and we are trying to find out if he's being generous, or taking us for mugs. As after all, it was him who decided to break the 12 month term not us.
Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated as with a new child, and having to find agency fees and another deposit with no credit available to us, we could really do without paying a week for when we aren't living here. We do want to be fair though, so we do need to know legally where we stand, I think that it may be over a barrell at the landlords mercy! :mad:

clutton_2

""that is one month into our 2 month notice period.""

a landlord has to give his tenants 2 months notice

a tenant has to give his landlord 1 months notice

irrespective of what it says in your tenancy agreement.

you need to give one months notice ending the day before rent day

Doooford

Thanks clutton, so are you actually saying that our landlord is helping out by letting us only pay up to the 3rd as opposed to the 23rd?
We took his notice as being a "get out ASAP" notice... ...so we did

Doooford

We took the notice as being a "get out ASAP because I need my home back", so we should still have to pay the last two months rent, irrespective of when we move out?

Welshwoofs

Doooford - you are due to pay rent up till the time the contract runs out. If your LL has given you 2 months' notice then you are liable to pay rent for that period. If your LL is letting you off a few weeks of that time, then yes he/she is doing you a favour.

If you wanted to move out before the 2 months' notice the LL has given you expires, you'd need to give 1 months notice yourself and you'd be liable to pay rent for that month.

Planner

I think your all missing the point here. The o/p is still within the fixed term. Therefore the statutory notice periods of 2 months for landlords and 1 month for tenants are irrelevant. The only notice periods that matter are the ones expressed in the break clause.

O/P it may be of benifit if you type out the full wording of the break clause for us. But from what ou have said so far, the landlord needs to give you 2 months notice to activate it, which he has done. As any notice you could serve would not expire sooner than his now, his offer why not 'generous' is reasonable, the alternative being you pay for the full 2 months.

franklee

I also think the point that the tenant is being put out due to the landlord's wanting the property back due to his own circumstances not the tenant's behaviour is being missed.

The tenant does not have to move out when a S21 notice expires, indeed there are landlords here who actively discourage this very thing. The tenant could wait till the landlord gets a court order thus inconveniencing the landlord. So as the landlord wants the property back in time I think he should support a tenant who has done their very best to accommodate that and charging rent till the tenant leaves and not a day more seems appropriate in this case. Really the tenant should have negotiated this before signing up to a new property, it's too late afterwards.

Also it may be the break clause is badly written or unfair or the S21 may have errors which would also give the tenant room to negotiate.

I do sympathise in having to move unexpectedly after just 8 of a 12 months fixed term when just having had a baby and when the tenant isn't at fault. The security of tenure good tenants get sucks IMO.

So if you haven't put any money down for the new place yet I'd just say and write to the LL, can you please charge rent till the date we move out only or we will have to let this new place go as we can't afford to pay for the overlap and we'll "hope" another place comes up with better timing but if it doens't sorry but we'll have to overstay the S21.

Doooford

Thanks Franklee, I think this may be the case anyway, as It looks like we actually wont be able to pay the overlap. We haven't paid anything for the new place, but agreements have been signed. I really don't want to screw anyone over, and I am actually a stickler for terms and conditions, so trhis is a bit of a new one on me, as ethically, I think he should let us off. When being informed of the notice, we were told that preferably the landlord wold like to be in 13 days before he 2 month period, this was verbally relayed though, so no records. Although it was made clear to us that we had the right to stay up to the end, we really felt for him due to recently suffering the bereavement of a parent, so I was keen to make it as easy as possible for his return.
But as the terms and conditions state, I do apprecate that actually you don't get rewarded for good will in a tenancy agreement, unfortunately it's only by digging your heels in do you get a fair deal. :rolleyes:
The contracts were through a main high street agency so don't hold much hope that they'd be errornous, if I have time tonight, which is doubtful as I get in at 5 as with our beloved child, we haven't got time think, let alone pack, but I'll maybe try and post it at work tomorrow.

Welshwoofs

franklee wrote: »

The tenant does not have to move out when a S21 notice expires, indeed there are landlords here who actively discourage this very thing. The tenant could wait till the landlord gets a court order thus inconveniencing the landlord.

The thing is though, the OP has posted about this situation before - here.

He's not turfing them out to be nasty, he needs to move back because his brother is terminally ill.

Now I guess there's all sorts of things the op could do to frustrate matters and make the LL's life hell at this point, but as he's apparently been a good LL.....would they really want to given the circumstances? I know I wouldn't.

It seems that he's willingly making financial compromises (which I'm sure are negotiable, like most things in life) so I can't really see there's any need to get 'heavy' simply because one can legally.

Doooford

Just to clarify, I'm not going to be getting heavy. Just really can't find the overlap money

Planner

franklee wrote: »

I also think the point that the tenant is being put out due to the landlord's wanting the property back due to his own circumstances not the tenant's behaviour is being missed.

The tenant does not have to move out when a S21 notice expires, indeed there are landlords here who actively discourage this very thing. The tenant could wait till the landlord gets a court order thus inconveniencing the landlord. So as the landlord wants the property back in time I think he should support a tenant who has done their very best to accommodate that and charging rent till the tenant leaves and not a day more seems appropriate in this case. Really the tenant should have negotiated this before signing up to a new property, it's too late afterwards.

Also it may be the break clause is badly written or unfair or the S21 may have errors which would also give the tenant room to negotiate.

I do sympathise in having to move unexpectedly after just 8 of a 12 months fixed term when just having had a baby and when the tenant isn't at fault. The security of tenure good tenants get sucks IMO.

So if you haven't put any money down for the new place yet I'd just say and write to the LL, can you please charge rent till the date we move out only or we will have to let this new place go as we can't afford to pay for the overlap and we'll "hope" another place comes up with better timing but if it doens't sorry but we'll have to overstay the S21.

Again I think the point his being missed. Lets be clear here that what has been served is not a s.21 notice in the traditional sense. The landlord, for what ever reason, has used a s.21 notice to initiate the breakclause. The s.21 notice should be treated as nothing more than this, as it obviously isnt valid as a s.21 notice.

Therefore all the usuall stuff about not having to move out until a court order is obtained is tricky in this situation. In my opinion not only will the o/p be liable for any costs associated with obtaining a court order (It would have to be a s.8 route by the way not s.21) but there are alo likley to be contracturally liable for the landlords costs in them not moving as they agreed to with the breakclause. This could be substantially and should be avoided.

The o/ps choices would appear somewhat limited.