Agent Liability - Ending Lease Agreement

ridin8ude

In December 2008 I signed a lease agreement for 18 months with a 12 month break clause.
Unfortunately being new to the UK I did not study the break clause as closely as I now know I should have.

In August I contacted the agent who is managing the property on behalf of the landlord to ask for clarity on the break clause – this was asked very specifically.

The response given was:
“13 December is when you can leave giving notice on 13 November ( 18 month contract 12 month break clause )”

Still not confident with that answer I followed up again in October 2009.
I also had two different documents from the agent, one the lease and the other a management confirmation letter, stating either a 2 month notice period or 1 month notice period.

Again the agent confirmed the 12 month break clause and 1 month notice.

Rather than risk not providing enough notice, I decided to give notice in October for the December lease termination.
Upon receiving my notification the landlord contacted me to tell me that he wasn’t clear on the break clause and was going back to the agent for confirmation.
After further debate they decided the break clause was for 14 months (12 months completed with 2 months notice after the 12th month) but agreed it was misleading and worded poorly.

Unfortunately by the time this was confirmed I had already entered into a new lease agreement for a new property.

So based on factually incorrect confirmation provided by the agent to me in writing, I now have a situation where I have 2 leases and 2 rents to pay until February.

As all of this communication was done via email I have records of the conversation with the agent, I would like to know if they are liable for this situation.
I would have never signed a new agreement with the knowledge that I’d have to pay an extra 2 months rent.

Appreciate any guidance or thoughts on how I could resolve this situation to avoid paying this additional rent.

DVardysShadow

What does the break clause actually say? What does the notice clause say?

chappers

A 12 month break clause would normally mean you can leave at the end of 12 months provided you give a months notice. Subject to notice been given at the correct times.
Forget the management letter its the tenancy agreement that counts.

ridin8ude

Hi there - sorry for the late reply.
Here is the break clause - happy to hear any interpretations.

From this clause I make out that my maximum liability is January 12th provided that I give 2 months notice in writing and that the agreement began on Dec 12th.

“To give two calendar month’s notice in writing to determine this Agreement, such notice not to be given at any time before the twelfth month of the Agreement period.”

Fire_Fox

12th to the 12th or 13th to the 13th is one month and one day, not one month. When exactly did you move in and which date do you normally pay rent? AFAIK the law says tenants must give ONE months notice and landlords TWO months.

N79

ridin8ude wrote: »

Hi there - sorry for the late reply.
Here is the break clause - happy to hear any interpretations.

From this clause I make out that my maximum liability is January 12th provided that I give 2 months notice in writing and that the agreement began on Dec 12th.

“To give two calendar month’s notice in writing to determine this Agreement, such notice not to be given at any time before the twelfth month of the Agreement period.”

Correct, provided notice served on November 12th, on one interpretation.

I could also advance January 11th as a possibility (the last day of a rental period) provided you serve your notice at the start of the 12th month (ie Nov 12th) and provided that all agree on this interpretation.

I guess 1 day makes little difference so simply agree with the LL the day, in writing, on which the tenancy will end.

N79

Fire_Fox wrote: »

12th to the 12th or 13th to the 13th is one month and one day, not one month. When exactly did you move in and which date do you normally pay rent?

Exactly the problem I allude to in my post.

ridin8ude

Date of Agreement as per the lease is Decemter 13th 2008 meaning to me it would end on Dec 12th 2009?
I'm not worried about the specific day so much - but the concept of the break clause.
Is it then 13 months in total or 14 months in total when excersizing the break clause? - the landlord has said 14 months so Feb 12th(or 13th).

tbs624

My interpretation of that clause would be that if you served notice on the 12 Nov then you would be free to leave by Jan 11.

(12th month running 12 November to 11 December) By giving your notice sooner than the 12th month all you have effectively done is given them extra notice.

Edit - now seen your follow on post: adjust dates to 13 Nov - Jan 12 for notice, 12 month running from 13 Nov to 12 Dec)

I don't read it as saying you cannot physically give notice prior to that date, more that it cannot be effective sooner than the start of the 12th month.

There is no standard wording for break clauses and many of them are ambiguous. Pretty p*ss poor though, if even the LA/LL can't understand/agree the meaning of their own AST clauses.

Never rely on an LA for an interpretation of your own rights - they act for the LL, not for the T. Many LAs set up in business with no qualifications, no training, no regulation, no common sense.

It is what is in the tenancy agreement that counts but given that the LA misled you the very least he could have done was to get the property re-advertised and a new T in place asap.

(What is the actual expiry date if you stayed for the full 18 months? is it the 12th?)

tbs624

ridin8ude wrote: »

Date of Agreement as per the lease is Decemter 13th 2008 meaning to me it would end on Dec 12th 2009?
I'm not worried about the specific day so much - but the concept of the break clause.
Is it then 13 months in total or 14 months in total when excersizing the break clause? - the landlord has said 14 months so Feb 12th(or 13th).

The quote you gave from the AST was
"before the twelfth month of the Agreement period.”

It doesn't say "before the 12th month has elapsed": it doesn't make it clear whether it means the beginning or the end of the twelfth month. The lack of clarity should mean that they agree to your interpretation : if they wanted to hold you to an additional month they would have to pursue it to court. IMO the poor wording , plus the muddle the LA presented to you in writing, would not help their case.

ridin8ude

Thanks all for the quick thoughts - I'm fairly confident of my understanding and will go back to the LL/LA on this.

To be fair the LL has been flexible it's the agent that's been difficult!