Contract Term(s) for tenants' protection

Crabman

Hi peeps

Looking for advice for an insertion to a contract regarding protection for tenants (they're students at university).

At present the contract is very much in LA/LL's favour but I'm looking to insert a clause into the contract that would give protection if there was an issue with the house, e.g. something along the lines of:

alternative local accommodation at landlord's cost if a major problem is not resolved within 24-48 hours.

If a major problem causes property to be uninhabitable, local accommodation to be provided asap.

If either a major or non-major issue remains unresolved for a reasonable period, tenants retain the right to terminate the contract without notice period, a return of deposit and other monies owed and reserve their legal rights to seek consequential losses & damages from LL/LA.

How about another term regarding deposits, as it seems from reading past posts on here that this is a common issue of contention. I believe it's being held with an independent scheme but not sure, will need to find out from the individuals I'm helping out.

The contract is for 12 months but as they're university students a 7-month break clause with 2 months notice has been negotiated with the LA so they will move out after 9 months, shortly after end of term.

They intend to pay each month's rent separately (between three tenants) so hopefully this is acceptable. The LA has some strange stipulations, e.g. the holding deposit had to be in cash, not card/cheque. They're also insisting on a guarantor for each tenant despite all being British 'Home' students though this appears to be standard practice.

Finally, is £200 for an "administration/reference fee" reasonable?

Any help and advice would be appreciated. Thanks

Emma1973

What counts as a 'major problem'? A dripping tap, roof falling in, etc? I think that needs to be clarified before you put that into a contract.

clutton_2

Crabman - trying to write legal clauses which comply with Landlord and tenant legislation is fraught with difficulties

""alternative local accommodation at landlord's cost if a major problem is not resolved within 24-48 hours.

so - local accommodation - B&B ? 5*hotel ? identical accommodation ? caravan ? - and for how long ? what constitutes a "major problem" ?? how near is local ?? how long will this accommodation be provided for ??

If a major problem causes property to be uninhabitable, local accommodation to be provided asap.

If either a major or non-major issue remains unresolved for a reasonable period, tenants retain the right to terminate the contract without notice period, a return of deposit and other monies owed and reserve their legal rights to seek consequential losses & damages from LL/LA.

so the landlord cannot find a part for the repair of a washing machine - the tenants can just walk out ????

sorry - but i just burst out laughing when i read all this - there is plenty of contingency legislation for unforseen disasters already in place under L&T acts - your attempts are laudable but utterly impossible to quantify - and would not be worth the paper they are written on. If you want additional repairs clauses inserted, then go buy a proper tenancy agreement from a reputable source and ASK the new LL if he is amenable to having some of these extra clauses inserted - he may just tell you where to go

Crabman

Thanks both, I'm glad I provided you with some comedy clutton but those weren't the actual terms I was thinking, just ideas. I'm familiar with county court situations where terms (e.g. 'reasonable') are interpreted fairly by a Judge so that's the reason for using similar terminology here.

The lease contract itself is apparently a template but the letting agent has told one of the new tenants that any repairs are 'between them and the landlord'. When I was at university I had a window that although double glazed, refused to close properly. The landlord kept giving excuses which went on for weeks, then months. It was never fixed. I'm trying to make sure they don't fall into any traps as it seems university students are easy targets for the not so nice landlords/agents.

When it comes to negotiation with letting agents it seems they always have the upper hand. If you make a request that they deny, you either agree or walk away. They know that in a high-demand sector someone less aware will come along and sign on the dotted line.

What is a reasonable procedure for repairs if needed? There is no mention in the contract of timescales or what happens if not completed reasonably. Also the issue of the property being uninhabitable isn't covered. Again, what would happen and what sort of obligations are there on the LL/LA to act fairly to the tenants?

Thanks again

clutton_2

if the current legislation is abided by prior to the tenants signing the AST - and if the tenant has actually READ and understood the agreement before signing - there are plenty of safeguards in place already.

the problem with student lets is they are, sadly, notorious for treating property with contempt.

Things to do -

if on viewing the property initially - if repairs are promised - DONT move in if they are not done when you arrive - no matter how inconveneint....

get the AST ahead of time and check it out with Shelter/CAB/housing advisor - cross out and initial anything you dont like and initial it - make sure tenants keep a copy at the point of signing - and talk to the LL/LA about these items

once you/they have signed - its too late

get an inventory done and get LL AND tenant to sign - if additional issues are found in the first week of tenancy WRITE them on an addendum to the inventory and send it to the LL

find out which deposit scheme the LL chooses to use before signing up - preferably as per a clause in the AST

get all this in WRITING

do have a read of the first couple of sticky threads on this forum - i am sure you will pick u a lot of useful tips -

but

please - dont try writing your own AST - if the LL has produced a rubbish one, and it a dispute ends in court the judge will take the side of the tenant as LLs are supposed to know what they are doing - tenants are not really expected to.

you will not find any definition of "reasonable" in any landlord and tenant legislation - you cannot legislation about so many variables in terms of repairs - each situation has to be judged on its merits

bw

Jowo_2

I'm against customising ASTs with additional sub-clauses - a landlord's and tenants statutory obligations can't be over-ridden. There is so much regulatory and legal guidance that it would be impossible to cover every scenario on an AST which outlines the barebones.

Minor legislation changes would cause havoc if each and every area of compliance was detailed. You can get an idea of how many have to be complied with by glancing through these links.

http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/regulations.htm
http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/legal_aspects.htm

There is adequate redress and escalations for all eventualities for both parties, though this takes a little knowledge or persistence if one or other of the parties are ignorant

I'm not surprised that an AST appears to favour landlord's - it's a contract that they issue - therefore despite it's 'one-sideness', there is plenty of protection for tenants embedded in housing law that cannot be detracted by the insertion of duff clauses by the landlord.

For example, in E&W, deposits have to be protected in a tenancy deposit scheme - there are penalties for non-compliance, a dispute service built in for these schemes or the small claims court as an escalation path, an inventory is good practice to prevent disputes around deductions. There is no further requirement to 'pad' out an AST with the specifics of how this works.

What is a reasonable procedure for repairs if needed? Shelter advise this should be done in writing, with copies kept. Their site is excellent on how to report and track repairs and how to escalate if not done. It doesn't 'need' to be in the AST. Some aspects, such as whether or not the tenants must wait in for repairs can be discussed at the outset.

There is no mention in the contract of timescales or what happens if not completed reasonably. The law demands that repairs are done in a reasonable time but doesn't stipulate the definition. Therefore, it's no surprise that there isn't an SLA in place. Tenants cannot expect repairs to take place any quicker than a householder can get them done. Again, Shelter provides excellent info on how to deal with inadequate or slow repairs and details which ones should be prioritised.

Also the issue of the property being uninhabitable isn't covered. Again, what would happen and what sort of obligations are there on the LL/LA to act fairly to the tenants? Again, this doesn't need to be spelled out in an AST as there is a legal obligation for a landlord to facilitate this.

bitsandpieces

£200 each in fees? Seems high, but not unheard of (sadly). Nice for the agents, though :eek:

There are major things which could break - and take a week or two to fix - where I don't know that it would be reasonable to expect the LL to pay for accommodation elsewhere. E.g. if the boiler broke on xmas eve and a part had to be ordered, that would take time to fix, possibly through no fault of the LL. An owner-occupier would expect to manage with electric heaters for a short time while this was fixed, and I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that (if young and healthy) tenants should do the same.

Jowo_2

Crabman wrote: »

Finally, is £200 for an "administration/reference fee" reasonable?

There is nothing that legally compels a landlord or agent to cap fees - they can and do charge whatever the market allows. Queries around reasonableness are irrelevant. If it's considered too steep, then the tenants are free to negotiate it or withdraw their interest.

franklee

IMO the best protection a tenant can get is to deal with a reputable agent and a reputable landlord. If you don't like the contract, or the way the LA/LL conduct themselves the best thing is to walk away as no matter what they promise leopards don't change their spots.

You can ask to read the contract and LA's terms and charges through in advance at any agent, I read half a dozen last time which has given me a list of my preferred agents and those I would not touch with a bargepole no matter how glossy the properties they advertise. Or ask the LL to see all paperwork in advance if going direct. There are some reasonable ones out there and IMO a reasonable contract is more likely to have a reasonable LA/LL behind it. Whereas a contract that does the tenant up like a kipper and gives the landlord slopey shoulders indicates to me people who aren't going to be that great to deal with. Even if the contract terms can't be enforced and even if the tenant in theory has the law on their side, prevention is better than cure as who wants the hassle dealing with them? This is why I'd look elsewhere if I didn't like the contract.

If you need help you can ask for recommendations at the university, there should be someone to advise on student accommodation and they will know the local LAs/LLs.

Jowo_2

franklee wrote: »

Whereas a contract that does the tenant up like a kipper and gives the landlord slopey shoulders indicates to me people who aren't going to be that great to deal with.

If a landlord has customised a standard AST with non-enforceable clauses that don't correspond with housing law, I agree the tenant should walk away. Even if they inadvertently sign it, statutory housing law will always take precedence and dumb clauses can be ignored and breached without any legal come-back.

But in the case of the OP he is looking for assurance within the AST for aspects that don't need to be present and are generally absent from standard ASTs.

In my opinion, they are looking for it to provide guarantees where a landlord is not obligated by law to provide a measurable response or don't appreciate that it's role is contractual, not to provide guidance on every aspect of the tenancy. In that case, confidence about how tenants rights are protected in law and ways to redress poor performance by a landlord can be found on advice sites like CAB or Shelter.

franklee

Jowo wrote: »

If a landlord has customised a standard AST with non-enforceable clauses that don't correspond with housing law, I agree the tenant should walk away. Even if they inadvertently sign it, statutory housing law will always take precedence and dumb clauses can be ignored and breached without any legal come-back.

But in the case of the OP he is looking for assurance within the AST for aspects that don't need to be present and are generally absent from standard ASTs.

In my opinion, they are looking for it to provide guarantees where a landlord is not obligated by law to provide a measurable response or don't appreciate that it's role is contractual, not to provide guidance on every aspect of the tenancy. In that case, confidence about how tenants rights are protected in law and ways to redress poor performance by a landlord can be found on advice sites like CAB or Shelter.

We don't know what the proposed contract in the OPs case is like, s/he could post it and we can chip in if it's reasonable.

But surely the best way forward for the OP is to ask at the university for recommendations so as to help pick reputable LAs/LLs. Regardless of the law, it's best to avoid the hassle of having to enforce it. So often tenants choose the property regardless of warning bells about the LA/LL and then are surprised if the LA/LL turn out duff.

I agree the OP writing their own terms is not the way forward.