section 21 advice

tbs624

Twinmummy wrote: »

We signed a 6 month ast which runs out at the end of the month,

Twinmummy wrote: »

ok thanks
Also it is dated 14th April 2010 and date of expiry is after 19th may 2010, dont they have to give 2 months notice not just 1?

If your Fixed Term runs until the end of May, as you said in your OP, then an S21 cannot bring that to an early end, even if they had served it with two months.

Your LA is clearly a fool.

If you would really like to stay on then download the LLs contact info from the LR (small fee)& speak to him direct. The LA may have convinced the LL that he is likely to end up with a void if your tenancy becomes periodic and you are able to leave with just one month's notice, and the LA wants to know they have their renewal fee in the bag plus a further fixed term percentage of the rental.

Alternatively, just sit tight and let them find out for themselves (in court) that the S21 is invalid - you'll probably still be there in August/September on the periodic that will arise when the FT ends

Disagree with N79 (a rarity!) on the boiler issue. S11 (1)(c) of the LL &T Act 1985 states that the LL has a legal obligation:

"to keep in repair and proper working order the installations in the dwelling-house for space heating and heating water."

I would argue that the word "proper" is key there. It ain't proper for a boiler to have to be on constantly:)

N79

pyueck wrote: »

Agreed speak to the landlord, say that you are happy to stay, but unwilling to pay the agents fee. There is no way the landlord will be unhappy as none of that £150 will be going in his pocket. The section 21 is invalid as it is not dated correctly and is not worth the paper it is written on.

With regard to the boiler the landlord does have an obligation to repair, even if there is a gas safety certificate and even if the damage is to a control unit and not the boiler itself. L&T act 1985, section 11 reads:
(b)to keep in repair and proper working order the installations in the dwelling-house for the supply of water, gas and electricity and for sanitation (including basins, sinks, baths and sanitary conveniences, but not other fixtures, fittings and appliances for making use of the supply of water, gas or electricity)
Clearly this applies to any installation for the supply of gas and not just a boiler. Write a letter to the agent saying that it needs to be repaired within a reasonable time, this is a completely separate issue from the renewal. If the LL tries to use your request to have the property maintained as a reason for not renewing your tenancy, then he's such a bad landlord it is probably best to leave anyway.

Yet again!

S11 (b) clearly excludes boilers as they would be an "other fixture, fitting or appliance for making use fo the supply of .... gas".

So why do you think that this section of the act you quote in any way places an obligation on LL's to maintain boilers? It clearly states the exact opposite.

The obligation to repair a boiler comes from S11 (c). Timing control unit faults which do not directly impact on the boiler (and which are often totally seperate items to the boiler) working are not part of the 11 (c) obligations as in many older installations this level of control flexibility just does not exist.

N79

tbs624 wrote: »

I would argue that the word "proper" is key there. It ain't proper for a boiler to have to be on constantly:)

I would disagree - I have recently installed a new type of boiler in a number of my properties and I was amazed to discover that the boiler is, in fact, on most if not all the time, albeit usually on a low setting and the system uses individual room thermostats for each set of radiators to control the temperature.

You beat me to the correct section of the LL and T act though.

But I suppose we are splitting hairs - we both agree that the repair should happen - and the last thing I want to do is to be seen as trying to defend a total muppet. I just disagree that legal obligation goes beyond the provision of a basic and working heating and hot water system.

Twinmummy_3

wow thanks for all the help and advice, will ask for the landlords details and see what they say.

princeofpounds

Just to reinforce what has been said here

- it is worth speaking to the LL direct. Agents typically misinform about the need for contract extensions and in reality there is little you have to do except sign an additional agreement to extend the fixed term of the pre-existing contract. Certainly not worth £150.

- Regarding the boiler, the repair should not be dependent upon contracts, it should just be done. If you don't get anywhere on this, we can guide you on the process to get it fixed yourself at the landlord's expense (google Lee Parker vs Izzet 1971 if you want).

pyueck

N79 wrote: »

Yet again!

S11 (b) clearly excludes boilers as they would be an "other fixture, fitting or appliance for making use fo the supply of .... gas".

So why do you think that this section of the act you quote in any way places an obligation on LL's to maintain boilers? It clearly states the exact opposite.

The obligation to repair a boiler comes from S11 (c). Timing control unit faults which do not directly impact on the boiler (and which are often totally seperate items to the boiler) working are not part of the 11 (c) obligations as in many older installations this level of control flexibility just does not exist.

You really don't like me do you!!! Section 11B explicitly refers to installations that supply gas, hence any control unit that directly controls supplies of gas to the property. I never said that section 11B gave the landlord an obligation with regard to the boiler, only that it gave the landlord an obligation with regard to the control unit in question. The control unit is a unit for supplying gas, not for using it such as an oven or a fireplace etc.

N79

pyueck wrote: »

You really don't like me do you!!! Section 21B explicitly refers to installations that supply gas, hence any control unit that directly controls supplies of gas to the property. I never said that section 21B gave the landlord an obligation with regard to the boiler, only that it gave the landlord an obligation with regard to the control unit in question. The control unit is a unit for supplying gas, not for using it such as an oven or a fireplace etc.

I don't like your attitude - I don't actually know you. I also don't like that you refuse to enter discussions yet post inflamatory statements and, on occasion, items / "facts" which are just plain wrong.

Anyway, what is this section 21B to which you refer?

A boiler / ch control unit (at least the item to which I am refering) is normally electrical, is related to timings and is nothing to do with the gas supply.

pyueck

N79 wrote: »

I don't like your attitude - I don't actually know you. I also don't like that you refuse to enter discussions yet post inflamatory statements and, on occasion, items / "facts" which are just plain wrong.

Anyway, what is this section 21B to which you refer?

A boiler / ch control unit (at least the item to which I am refering) is normally electrical, is related to timings and is nothing to do with the gas supply.

It is an electical unit that controls the supply of gas. Yes I meant 11 not 21, ok happy? Just what are these factually incorrect statements I am supposed to have made. Inflamatory, when, controversial maybe, but somebody needs to stand up for tenants. Are you sure it is not my agenda you don't like rather than my attitude?

N79

This ones going to be off topic OP - sorry.

pyueck wrote: »

Yes I meant 11 not 21, ok happy?

Thank you for clarifying - I did not understand your post. I thought you were refering to the Housing Act 1988 S21b - a fairly important clause for English tenancies.

Just what are these factually incorrect statements I am supposed to have made. Inflamatory, when, controversial maybe, but somebody needs to stand up for tenants. Are you sure it is not my agenda you don't like rather than my attitude?

Do you have another agenda? I thought your agenda was a fair deal for Ts? In which case, I rather think that you and I have more or less the same agenda, albeit we may disagree on some of the finer points. Do we not both agree that English LL and T law is somewhat broken and has a strong inbuilt bias towards the rights of LLs and against the rights of Ts?

If truth be told I admire you zeal to propose changes and would strongly encourage you to continue and to get involved when, as I suspect wil happen soon, the question of yet another housing act is opened to yet again tweak the edges of the English system. Take part in the consultation and submit your views - they will be very welcome.

For each of your "controversial" posts I have taken the time suggest to you which of your ideas are workable and which are not. However, when people ask for an opinion on how to solve a problem then I feel that it is important to look for practical solutions for them and not use each case as part of a wider crusade that I may have.

However, your constant attempts to portray all LLs as bad (and all Ts as blameless) and to suggest that LLs are evil etc is not going to win you support in your aim to effect chages.

Like it or not, the private residential lettings system is now a necessary and essential part of the English housing scene so any reforms need to take into account the legitimate concerns of the (vast) majority of decent LLs who provide an increasing amount of the housing stock. History has shown that unrealistic LL and T law leads, over time, to a reduction in the available housing stock as happend after the rent acts of the 1970s. Back then there was a large pool of social housing to make up the difference. There is no such safety margin now so the unknown effects of getting this balancing act wrong could have disasterous repercussion.

A recent example of a change which, although there is no evidence to back this up - yet - I fear will have long term consequences is the extension of selective licensing to all properties in certain areas. The effect, I fear, will be to stop the creation of "affordable" (ie cheap, not some rediculous shared ownership scheme which is really about proping up banks and the baby boomer generation) house share arrangements which young people need to be able to start their independent life.

Many of the posters here disagree with each other (indeed TBS and myself disagreed within this very thread). Neither of us can prove the other wrong and we can happily agree to disagree on what is a fairly minor issue. Disagreement does not mean we hate each other. We accept that there are plenty of bad LLs and plenty of bad Ts. Yes, your tendancy to assume LLs are evil has annoyed me, I would by lying if I said otherwise. It appears to be a strong bias behind your posts and it seems clear that you have had a bad housing experience which drives you to action. I'm sure we can all look forward to many more posts from you - the more people there are to point the victims of bad LLs and Ts towards help the better.

clutton_2

in other words s/he's got a chip on the shoulder......