Previous tenants still in property i've just rented

Jowo_2

Cirrusmp,

I appreciate your impatience but the landlord's hands are tied because of the slow legal eviction process. By law, it is the current tenants property for their exclusive use and they have quiet enjoyment of it - the arrears or end of the tenancy are irrelevant to their secure and protected status. Until such time that the landlord gets a court order or the tenants leave of their own accord, no-one may enter the property without the tenants consent. A breach of this can be both a criminal and civil offence. They aren't 'visitors' or 'guests' in the eyes of the law and any activity that can be classed as trespass or harassment is extremely serious. Keep well away.

Clearly, they aren't going to leave because no landlord in their right mind would take on tenants that have been evicted for arrears and because they feel they might get a council property once evicted. This gatekeeping policy, whereby councils force tenants given notice to remain in the property until a court order is gained is one reason why some landlords refuse to take on LHA/HB tenants (there's no evidence on this thread that the tenants are claiming LHA but low income/benefit claimants are most likely to approach a council for rehousing and be told to stay put which is one reason why landlords steer clear of benefit tenants who are harder to evict).

barnaby-bear

cirrusmp wrote: »

Hi Everyone,

Thanks for all your replies.
I see that the general consensus is to find somewhere else asap and i am inclined to agree. I will give her to the end of the week before i start pursuing her for deposits and things but will also start making alternative arrangements and sort out some viewings for the weekend.

From what i understand, the family in there is also on an assured shorthold tennancy agreement which is why she had arranged for me to move in 2 weeks after, so they are no longer tenants in the house anyway. Is an eviction notice then still necessary, even though they are not tenants?

barnaby-bear - yes, the landlord has also signed the agreement and there are two copies, one held by myself and the other by the landlord.

robpw2 - Does it make a difference that i would not actually be forcing entry, i'd have keys, as it has surely become my house since the tennancy agreement comes into force and they do not have one?. A similar situation to telling a visitor to get out of your house?

Thanks again for all the replies.

MP

They *ARE* still tenants at the end of AST fixed period, all that has happened is the LL has asked for possession and they've said no and in order to end the tenancy the LL must pursue the legal rahter than asking nicely route. You do not have a tenancy on the property because there isn't one for the LL to agree with you as they have no legal ability to issue a second later tenancy on the property until the first ends. The LL is in the wrong here signing to a contract they can't fulfil and have breeched. If a property is inhabitable and you start paying her rent she is obliged to provide alternative accommodation - her breech of contract incurring you expense is something you can pursue her for via hte small claims or settle between yourselves.

Fire_Fox

cirrusmp wrote: »

Hi Everyone,

Thanks for all your replies.
I see that the general consensus is to find somewhere else asap and i am inclined to agree. I will give her to the end of the week before i start pursuing her for deposits and things but will also start making alternative arrangements and sort out some viewings for the weekend.

From what i understand, the family in there is also on an assured shorthold tennancy agreement which is why she had arranged for me to move in 2 weeks after, so they are no longer tenants in the house anyway. Is an eviction notice then still necessary, even though they are not tenants?

barnaby-bear - yes, the landlord has also signed the agreement and there are two copies, one held by myself and the other by the landlord.

robpw2 - Does it make a difference that i would not actually be forcing entry, i'd have keys, as it has surely become my house since the tennancy agreement comes into force and they do not have one?. A similar situation to telling a visitor to get out of your house?

Thanks again for all the replies.

MP

I would suggest you start making a move now on this - put into writing to the landlord that you understand the property does not have vacant possession so you wish to have your money returned and you will look for alternative accomodation. If the sitting tenants move out and you haven't found somewhere else you can always go back to property one.

Do not get involved in harrassing these tenants. If they are/ were on a AST they still have legal possession of the house until such time as they are evicted by a court order. We don't even know if the landlord has served them the proper notice yet.

cirrusmp

<Please Delete>

clutton_2

on most tenancy agreements there are 2 dates on page one

start date

due date

these do not have to be the same date.

when you signed your agreement what are the dates in these two places ?

thequant

isn't everyone missing the obvious here ? if there is a tenancy agreement that has been signed and the tenant should of had possession of the property since the 3rd of september and has not, then the landlord has breached the contract and the rest is academic, i.e. the guy is entitled to his money back and to chase up any costs incurred because of the LL's breach of the contract ?

tek-monkey

thequant wrote: »

isn't everyone missing the obvious here ? if there is a tenancy agreement that has been signed and the tenant should of had possession of the property since the 3rd of september and has not, then the landlord has breached the contract and the rest is academic, i.e. the guy is entitled to his money back and to chase up any costs incurred because of the LL's breach of the contract ?

What he said. You didn't break the contract, he did.

teeni

The landlord can not charge you for a property you have not moved into, if you have both a signed contract for a property that you can not enter that is in effect an unlawful eviction and maybe a letter reminding the landlord of this when requesting the return of your deposit and compensation for the inconvenience may result in him answering your calls again.