Assured Shorthold Tenancy Question

daveboy

A year ago, in June 2009, my wife and I signed a 12 month assured shorthold tenancy agreement, which was fine as it was a new address and this is pretty standard when renting a house.

This agreement came to an end around the middle of June.

We believed that as we heard nothing at all (property is dealt with by a letting agent but any issues we phone the landlord directly) the agreement would go to a rolling month by month agreement (subject to the usual two months notice if the landlord wants us out and one month if we choose to go).

Yesterday we received two copies of another shorthold tenancy agreement, dated from the start of next week.

Therefore for the last month or so we have been at the address with no agreement in place.

I need help in one respect, I think. There is no mention in the original 2009 agreement about what happens at the end of the 12 months. Is there anything in law that would dictate that in not acting before the agreement ended, a rolling month by month agreement can be 'assumed'.

I am reluctant at the moment to sign the agreement in case there is any possibility that by the agent/landlord not acting until now we can legally 'assume' a month by month agreement.

I have a medical history surrounding ulcerative colitis, a stoma and a large hernia, so want to be careful before tying ourselves down for another year.

We love the house and have no issues at all with our landlord. I am simply curious as to whether I have any rights in this situation.

Thank you in advance and apologies if I've been a bit confusing in outlining the situation at times in my description above.

BitterAndTwisted

If your original 12 month AST has expired you are already on a rolling periodic tenancy and have been since the day after the expiry date. Sounds to me like the agents have screwed up and got the dates wrong. This could bode ill.

You could contact the agent and ask them why they have issued a new AST with the wrong dates but if you were on a fixed-term which ended in the middle of June you should have discussed going onto a periodic tenancy, signing a new AST or confirmed that you would be moving out before the AST expired. Is there a reason why you chose to do none of those?

clutton_2

if you want to stay more flexibly.. write to the agent and say you do not want a fixed term and are happy to stay on the statutory periodic tenancy which you are on at the moment...

daveboy

We assumed that as we heard nothing at all we would automatically go on to a rolling month to month agreement.

I have rented a house before where this has been the case after the initial 12 month agreement.

Would I be within my rights to insist that the agreement I have just been sent be changed so it starts from the middle of June (the day after the last one ended)? Effectively making it an 11 month agreement as one month has already gone.

Sorry BitterAndTwisted but I always thought the agents were supposed to come to me, as that is their job. Not me go chasing after them.

Edited to add: Ideally we would rather have the flexibility of the periodic tenancy in case something unexpected happens, such as my health or losing a job in the current climate.

Planner

Your under no obligation to sign a new agreement and can stay on the periodic tenancy if you like.

The LL/LA may decide to serve you your two months notice if the LL is looking for more security, although if you have been good tenants with no issues the LL is unlikley to do this. Dont be pressured into signing something you may not be able to ultimatley pay for, and dont be pressured into serving notice, let the LL/LA serve it on you.

Good Luck

G_M

daveboy wrote: »

We assumed that as we heard nothing at all we would automatically go on to a rolling month to month agreement.
You are absolutely right.
Would I be within my rights to insist that the agreement I have just been sent be changed so it starts from the middle of June (the day after the last one ended)? Effectively making it an 11 month agreement as one month has already gone.
Why bother? If you are happy to sign a new 12 month contract, sign it. If you want to remain on a periodic contract, don't sign it.
Sorry BitterAndTwisted but I always thought the agents were supposed to come to me, as that is their job. Not me go chasing after them.
It is polite to contact your LL/agent as a fixed term comes to an end, but equally any efficient professional agent/LL would contact a tenant. legally, however there is no requirement for any contact. As you have said, if you stay after the fixed term and continue to pay rent, your existing contract simply continues on a periodic basis.
Edited to add: Ideally we would rather have the flexibility of the periodic tenancy in case something unexpected happens, such as my health or losing a job in the current climate.

So don't sign the new contract. The LL's options are to let you continue as a periodic tenant, or give 2 months notice. Why should he give himself the trouble and cost of finding a new tenant and having the property empty for a month or 2?

tbs624

daveboy wrote: »

This agreement came to an end around the middle of June.......

Yesterday we received two copies of another shorthold tenancy agreement, dated from the start of next week.

Therefore for the last month or so we have been at the address with no agreement in place.

Its not correct to say there has been "no agreement in place" for the past month. If you remain in occupation after Fixed Term expiry and the LL has not sought a court order for repossession then the law (Housing Act 1988) allows
for a Satutory periodic Tenancy to arise. This means that all the original FT contract terms apply, bar the "determination, ie when the contract will end. This requires 2 months notice from the LL, one from you (you may however have effectively already had your 2 months from the LL if you have been served a valid s21 Notice earlier in the tenancy)

daveboy wrote: »

I need help in one respect, I think. There is no mention in the original 2009 agreement about what happens at the end of the 12 months. Is there anything in law that would dictate that in not acting before the agreement ended, a rolling month by month agreement can be 'assumed'.

Operates as above, but the LL can subsequently request that you sign a further FT if this is how s/he wishes to continue. You can either (a) accept the new FT (b) negotiate to remain on the SP (c) give one month's notice, timed with your "rental period"

What the LA/LL has to allow for though is that having "allowed" a Stat Periodic to arise, they also have to time the new AST to coincide with the "rental period". Your stat periodic ran from the day after the expiry of the FT ( which may or may not coincide with rent due dates). So, if your contract finished on say 15th June, your SP runs from 15-14th of subsequent months. The LA could not then simply present you with an AST with a date start, say, of 27th July.

You say that you have contact with the LL so tell him direct that you would prefer to remain on an SP. The likelihood is that the LA is hoping to grab a "renewal fee" from both you and the LL for th e pleasure of signing the new Fixed Term agreement

N79

tbs624 wrote: »

What the LA/LL has to allow for though is that having "allowed" a Stat Periodic to arise, they also have to time the new AST to coincide with the "rental period". Your stat periodic ran from the day after the expiry of the FT ( which may or may not coincide with rent due dates). So, if your contract finished on say 15th June, your SP runs from 15-14th of subsequent months. The LA could not then simply present you with an AST with a date start, say, of 27th July.

Why?

LL and T could either:

i) include a deed of surrender with the tenancy agreement (bulletproof option)

ii) or just go ahead and sign the new agreement to start on whatever date suits them. What argument would you make to claim that a LL and T signing a new agreement for the same property did not constitute "surrender by operation of the law"? Clearly having two tenancies on the same property would be absurd.

tbs624

N79 wrote: »

Why?

LL and T could either:

i) include a deed of surrender with the tenancy agreement (bulletproof option)

ii) or just go ahead and sign the new agreement to start on whatever date suits them. What argument would you make to claim that a LL and T signing a new agreement for the same property did not constitute "surrender by operation of the law"? Clearly having two tenancies on the same property would be absurd.

The point is that the T in this thread does not apparently want to sign up for a new FT, but is effectively having one foisted upon him/her by the LL or, more likely, by the LA. In this case the LL/LA has to have correctly served notice to the T to end the periodic tenancy. The OP hasn't given precise dates but it is possible that the date on which the LA wishes the new FT to begin does not tie in with there having been a complete rental period under the current SP.

Clearly, if a LL and T are both happy to sign up to a new FT then they can pick their mutually acceptable date.:)

N79

tbs624 wrote: »

The point is that the T in this thread does not apparently want to sign up for a new FT, but is effectively having one foisted upon him/her by the LL or, more likely, by the LA.

Indeed, but that is sadly the LL's prerogative.

In this case the LL/LA has to have correctly served notice to the T to end the periodic tenancy. The OP hasn't given precise dates but it is possible that the date on which the LA wishes the new FT to begin does not tie in with there having been a complete rental period under the current SP.

I'm afraid that I just can't see your point with this bit. Of course any notice needs to end on the last day of a rental period but the proposed start date of a theoretical new AST is irrelevant to the notice dates (unless your saying that the LL might have become confused and will issue notice using incorrect dates). I don't believe that notice has yet been served to the OP so the periodic tenancy which has already arisen will continue for at least a couple of months, assuming the LL is daft enough to actually issue notice.

I might just be having a bad day but I can't see where you are going with this new AST start date issue?

tbs624

No argument about it being the LLs prerogative.

The OP has asked what rights s/he has. In the first post there is this

"This agreement came to an end around the middle of June."

and this

"Yesterday we received two copies of another shorthold tenancy agreement, dated from the start of next week."

N79 wrote: »

... I don't believe that notice has yet been served to the OP so the periodic tenancy which has already arisen will continue for at least a couple of months, assuming the LL is daft enough to actually issue notice.

I might just be having a bad day but I can't see where you are going with this new AST start date issue?

LOL.
As we both know, LAs are apt to spout rubbish to Ts. The point is that the T needs to be aware of that it's not just a case of the LA saying "you must sign this here and now" and the T must do as bid.

If the OP's Stat Periodic is running "mid-month" to mid month then the LA cannot unilaterally decide that a new FT will have to apply from, say, the 27th of this month because the SP's current "rental period" would be running through until mid August and the LA/LL has to honour that. Extra time to consider options and discuss direct with the LL is always useful.