Tenancy agreement rules

downshifter

Good morning

I've lived in my present rented house for 8 years, had a tenancy agreement from the landlord at first, then another in 2006 when she put the rent up. I want a more recent agreement as this one isn't acceptable for housing benefit purposes so am about to ring the landlady. I'll probably end up typing it up myself and giving it to her to sign (she's never signed the previous ones, only I have) and it will probably say much the same. It doesn't matter much as presumably this rolled into a periodic 6 months after I first moved in and the agreement from 2006 says much the same as the first one.

However there are a couple of items on it that I want to put right or maybe rephrase.

9 - The landlord may ask to enter and examine the premises at any time, whether occupied or not.

...obviously the landlord may 'ask' at any time they like, but legally they need to give acceptable notice of visiting, and definitely not just let themselves in even if I'm out. Although this statement is ambiguous, from my knowledge of them I feel the intent behind it is to cover themselves if they want to just turn up and have a nose around.

10 The tenant is responsible for any loss through fire damage or busts (their spelling not mine!) water pipes etc; and must take out insurance as necessary.

Again ambiguous, but my understanding is that I'm responsible for my own property, (so consequently can make my own decisions about contents insurance, they can't insist I do so) but not for the fabric of the house. I think the intent behind this statement is that I insure the whole building. I'm almost certain they don't have insurance for the house though have no way of knowing for sure.

Can anyone let me know if I've got this right please, and maybe suggest a form of words that I could put to them to alter on the agreement so that it's vaguely right but without sounding too confrontational? As I say, in lots of ways it doesn't matter from a legal point of view - and I don't need a new agreement except for the housing benefit - but I would like the landlords to understand what their responsibilities are too, as this agreement is all about their rights and my responsibilities and redoing the tenancy agreement is a good time to formally redress this a bit.

Thank you

DS

BitterAndTwisted

Why isn't your tenancy agreement from 2006 acceptable for LHA/Housing Benefit purposes and has your Local Authority confirmed this?

clutton_2

if an agreement is not signed by both tenant and landlord then the local authority may say that there is no legal agreement.. as there is nothing stopping anyone from just making up a tenancy....maybe this is why ?

if they have not entered your home for 8 years why are you bothering now - the clause says she can ask.. it does not say you have to agree.. and indeed you dont... tenants are entitled to quiet enjoyment....

Clause 10 is about you acting in a "tenant like m anner" - ie keeping the heating on sufficiently to prevent the pipes from freezing and bursting and is a fairly standard clause requirment...

if you set fire to the house - then you will be liable for the damage.... if you dont set fire to it and someone else does.. you are not liable....

why not download a new agreement from Property Hawk ?>

downshifter

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

Why isn't your tenancy agreement from 2006 acceptable for LHA/Housing Benefit purposes and has your Local Authority confirmed this?

Yes they have - I went along thinking it was acceptable but although the girl double-checked with her manager, it isn't ok. It proves I was a tenant in 2006 but not now. The alternative is a form for my landlord to complete, but she's as unlikely to do that without major hassle, as to get the agreement right, so I decided to go for the agreement option.

princeofpounds

9 - The landlord may ask to enter and examine the premises at any time, whether occupied or not.

Don't worry about it. Of course they can ask at any time, and your right to quiet enjoyment is protected under statute and common law so it doesn't specifically need to be in your contract.

The tenant is responsible for any loss through fire damage or busts (their spelling not mine!) water pipes etc; and must take out insurance as necessary.

This is an unenforceable clause. Landlords are responsible under Section 11 of the LL&T act for fixing structural problems with the property unless the tenant has actually caused them, and this cannot be contracted away to the tenant in this manner (for residential tenancies). Just delete it.

They cannot ask you to buy insurance either (well, they can ask, but again is unenforceable).

This will help you:

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/unfair_contract_terms/oft356.pdf

Whilst the OFT is not the law (i.e. a court can decide differently to the OFT) this is prepared by their lawyers on the basis of past cases and interpretation of the law so broadly speaking is reliable guidance. It also explains the principles behind determining if a clause is unfair or not.

downshifter

clutton wrote: »

if an agreement is not signed by both tenant and landlord then the local authority may say that there is no legal agreement.. as there is nothing stopping anyone from just making up a tenancy....maybe this is why ?

if they have not entered your home for 8 years why are you bothering now - the clause says she can ask.. it does not say you have to agree.. and indeed you dont... tenants are entitled to quiet enjoyment....

I know that, but they don't, so I thought it would be a good opportunity to reword that bit to be totally clear. They've been round, or sent others round, when I've been out - the neighbours have told me.

clutton wrote: »

Clause 10 is about you acting in a "tenant like m anner" - ie keeping the heating on sufficiently to prevent the pipes from freezing and bursting and is a fairly standard clause requirment...

if you set fire to the house - then you will be liable for the damage.... if you dont set fire to it and someone else does.. you are not liable.....

Again, I know and accept that, of course I do - but they don't know that. The implication is that by putting these things into the agreement it absolves them from their legal responsibilities

Have had a look at a sample from Property Hawk, thank you for that advice. Goodness, I would have to heavily doctor it and rewrite in English for us both, and I think it would be far too confrontational anyway. An interesting site anyway, thank you for recommending it.

Ds.

clutton_2

i am at a loss to understand why HB refuse to accept an old tenancy.... just because it is old.... if one of my tenants who is working gets made redundant and claims HB / LHA - i dont have to get a new AST signed... i think someone at the council does not know what they are talking about....

once the fixed term ends - the agreement automatically becomes a Statutory Periodic Tenancy..... so you DO have a legal tenancy right now .. i have tenants who have been on SPT for 5 years or more....

HappyMJ

clutton wrote: »

i am at a loss to understand why HB refuse to accept an old tenancy.... just because it is old.... if one of my tenants who is working gets made redundant and claims HB / LHA - i dont have to get a new AST signed... i think someone at the council does not know what they are talking about....

once the fixed term ends - the agreement automatically becomes a Statutory Periodic Tenancy..... so you DO have a legal tenancy right now .. i have tenants who have been on SPT for 5 years or more....

Agreed and council have asked the tenant to get the landlord to fill in a form stating the current rent and the tenant above has declined saying that it would be a major hassle..... I know what I would do.

downshifter

HappyMJ wrote: »

Agreed and council have asked the tenant to get the landlord to fill in a form stating the current rent and the tenant above has declined saying that it would be a major hassle..... I know what I would do.

?What would you do?

BitterAndTwisted

Why on earth would it be a hassle to get the landlord to confirm in writing what the rent is? It's on the newer rental agreement so it's not like it's not true or anything. An obvious alternative is to ask the LL to countersign this blessed agreement and be done with it unenforceable clauses notwithstanding

Seems to me that the OP is looking for difficulties and complications where there may not be any

downshifter

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

Why on earth would it be a hassle to get the landlord to confirm in writing what the rent is? It's on the newer rental agreement so it's not like it's not true or anything. An obvious alternative is to ask the LL to countersign this blessed agreement and be done with it unenforceable clauses notwithstanding

Seems to me that the OP is looking for difficulties and complications where there may not be any

You may be right but....

I ring her and ask her if she minds doing it. Will hum and ha a bit. Will ask me to send it which I do (enclosing SAE to me)

3 wks later I ring and ask if she received it. Yes she has, needs to ask her husband to go over it.

3 weeks later I ring and ask if she's had a chance to ask her husband. Yes she has, but he says their son ought to check it out.

3 weeks later I ring and ask if she's had a chance to check with son. She says yes but she needs to come round and see me about it (she lives 20 miles away). She will ring me and let me know when she's free - husband also needs to be free.

3 weeks later I ring and ask if she's found an available date yet? Yes she has but she's going to visit a friend in this area on the same day as it's such a long way away, so will get back to me when she's confirmed this with friend.

3 weeks later I ring to see if she's checked with friend. No answer. No voicemail available and she only has a mobile not a landline. I ring next day, and next. Then I try her daughter. No, landlady is on a months holiday in France.

This is no joke, this is something else that's been going on since Christmas to do with maintenance but has always been the pattern of our communication. I just thought that talking about the contract rather than a form that only benefits me, would motivate her to do it. And next time, I'll take it round to her house and sit on the doorstep till it's sorted.

Have just tried to ring and again, no answer and no voicemail. I really think she doesn't mean to be obstructive, it's just that her family are real country folk, as so many are round here, and live much as they did 50 or more years ago with the accompanying speed of life and accompanying suspicion of any sort of official forms.

Thanks
DS

Interesting though, that on the one occasion I made an error on my rent cheque, they were on the phone immediately!!! I'd say lol there if I wasn't too old!