Tenancy contracts

Allan87

Wondering if anyone can clarify something for me, 3 tenants each sign an emailed agreement we print out and then scan and email back to the agent. Is it still legally binding if there's not a master copy of an agreement with everybodys signature on or are scanned copies fine?

clutton_2

go on.. tell us why you want to leave early......

Allan87

clutton wrote: »

go on.. tell us why you want to leave early......

accumulation of things, just be glad when it ends.

N79

Its legally binding - there is no need for all signatures to be on one agreement.

N79

clutton wrote: »

go on.. tell us why you want to leave early......

Your crystal ball is functioning well tonight!:D

clutton_2

we've heard such attempts at "getting out of legal contracts" so many times here.. its become second nature to "sigh - oh here's another one"

i have no objection to helping anyone try to negotiate an early surrender if things are bad in a tenancy, and i will not condone bad landlording, but these weasly sort of get-outs are just that.. weasly

Fire_Fox

Allan87 wrote: »

accumulation of things, just be glad when it ends.

If you provide examples we can give suggestions/ advice/ ideas on how best to address the problems. You are in a legally binding AST simply because you have paid rent and received accommodation in return, a written contract is not required according to Shelter.

DVardysShadow

clutton wrote: »

we've heard such attempts at "getting out of legal contracts" so many times here.. its become second nature to "sigh - oh here's another one"

i have no objection to helping anyone try to negotiate an early surrender if things are bad in a tenancy, and i will not condone bad landlording, but these weasly sort of get-outs are just that.. weasly

I agree. I too support helping to negotiate an early surrender. But the thing which sticks in my throat is that when the tenants want to leave they ask whether such and such a deficiency can render the agreement null and void - but they were happy to agree to the contract in the first place and saw all the deficiencies and believed that it was a valid agreement, they actually must have thought that the agreement was good enough to uphold their rights.

clutton_2

not wanting to take responsibility for themselves.....

i watched half of a weird Beat the Bailifs programme today .. a 20-30 year old with £18k of debts because she buys £1800 chairs and antique Tibetan rugs... blah blah... the programme is meant to teach young folks how debt can ruin their lives

her house was stripped by the bailiffs and after deductions of bailiffs and auctioneers fees were paid she had taken less than £3k off the debt... "thats not fair" she bleated.... no thought for all those people who had sold her stuff on credit and never got their money.....

heaven preserve us from the debt-addicted young.... and old ...

N79

I've always thought that if the T believes there is no contract then they should immediately vacate the premises and pay storage costs for their goods - after all thats would be the consequence of no tenancy. Somehow though, that just doesn't seem reasonable to people!

However, if the OP wants help on negotiating a surrender or dealing with the tenancy issues then I am happy to offer my opinion.