Two Rental Questions

Ben_Reeve-Lewis

Dont know if this helps but I'll throw my hat into the ring anyway.

Prior to 1997 6 months was the shortest fixed term a landlord could set, then the law changed with the Housing Act 1996. Now you can have fixed terms of a shorter length but a landlord cant use the standard "end of fixed term" reason for evicting (Known as a 'Ground Only Claim') until 6 months have expired, even if the letting was for 3 months. But as suggested above, a landlord can seek possession anytime on grounds of rent arrears etc, without reference to the fixed term.

I would say that the fixed term, in your case 3 months, is a binding contractual agreement and if you leave with months owing you may be liable for any remaining periods on the fixed term. I have posted elsewhere on MSA about a landlord's duty to mitigate their loss before chasing for monies owed. It was originally the case until a case law in 2006, Reichman & Anor v. Beveridge & Anor, when the judge suggested otherwise but then another case points the finger back at landlords again in 2009's Bulkhaul Ltd v. Rhodia Organique Fine Ltd.

I get why your landlord keeps tying you into 3 month contracts, it's so he has a financial sword of Damocles over your head but having said that, as a tenant, you only need give 1 months formal deed of termination, not the 2 months notice he has to give you, but the fixed term still leaves matters hanging.

It is also common for the deposit to be offset against rent. Many landlords tell their tenants to keep the last month's rent in lieu of deposit anyway

hope this helps.

clutton_2

Ben - whilst i appreciate that you are a professional housing advisor, please dont make broad generalisations about how us landlords work

you claim that ""It is also common for the deposit to be offset against rent. Many landlords tell their tenants to keep the last month's rent in lieu of deposit anyway"

This may well have been the case prior to the tenancy deposit scheme being brought in.....

Nowadays i cannot imagine many professional landlords offering a tenant to keep the last months rent.. (payable in advance) - as where then are the funds to pay for possible tenant damage - which is only assessable after the end of the tenancy.....

i would never dream of doing this... indeed this is the first time i have read this in 11 years of being a professional landlord.....

Ben_Reeve-Lewis

Clutton, there was no disrespect intended in my above post and I advise on around 20 or 30 new housing advice issues a week and landlords telling tenants to retain the last month's rent, offset against deposit is very common still, I would say more the norm in fact.

Planner

Can I raise the dirty subject of deposit protection - is it?

G_M

Telling a tenant to use the deposit for the last month's rent defeats the whole purpose of deposits! I would never sanction this and am amazed to hear that many LLs do. Not in my experience.

Until a tenant has left the LL has no idea what items might be missing or damaged. That is why LLs take deposits in the first place.

clutton_2

I could not agree with you more GM !!

if i wasn't so cynical i might just think that some tenants seeking Ben's advice have SAID that is what the LL has said..... has Ben verified this with the LL on each occasion ?

Ben_Reeve-Lewis

Yeah of course some tenants tell me that and it doesnt turn out to be true but there are still many landlords who suggest it first and even put it in writing. I think Clutton you mentioned earlier about profeessional landlords but bear in mind, given my particular job, the vast majority of landlords I encounter could not be described in any way as 'Professional'. Most of them are termed 'Rogue Landlords' who dont protect the deposit at all. What always surprises people is how many of them there are out there.

People often say to me that they accept that Rogue landlords are operating, what surprises them is how many. Even if only 5% of landlords are rogue, in terms of actual numbers that is still thousands and those are the client base of Tenancy Relations Officers like myself and Housing Advisers accross the country. I would say around 75% of tenants who come to me for assitance dont have an address for their landlord and the landlord refuses to give them receipts for rent paid. They have no gas safe certificates and regard the desposit from day 1 as a bit of extra cash. The problem is huge and largely hidden.

In extreme cases In my years as a TRO I have dealt with landlords who have stabbed, tenants, broken their fingers, cut their throats, pulled a gun on them, stolen all their belongings (about one of those a week actually) Threats to kill are very common as are utility disconnections. Maybe it's my work or just living in south London :rotfl:

More commonly though it is a case of landlords acting out of frustration at the actions of nightmare tenants who just wont pay the rent and and ignorance of the law. I always try to find a solution for everyone. Very rarely I find a rogue landlord who takes these actions without provocation.

I rent myself and am overjoyed that I have pro landlords who did a full inventory, supplied me with gas safe and EPC plus DPS cert. They even apologised when we moved in for bombarding us with paperwork. That is simply not the daily experience of so many.

Ben_Reeve-Lewis

Oh and G_M I meant to say I agree it defeats the object of deposit protection, but the overall object of depsoit protection is not the objective of the rogue landlord.Their objective is avoiding the admin hassle and increase their chances of keeping the money

clutton_2

""Their objective is avoiding the admin hassle and increase their chances of keeping the money ""

but if the tenant does not pay their last months rent the LL is no better off.......


Ben - i think you paint an extreme picture - and South East London certainly seems to have more than its fair share of violence in the media.... but - if we agree that 5% of landlords are rogues (and i think this is a guesstimate as i cannot see how this can be statistically proven) - then 5% is certainly not HUGE as you say..... It is 5% too many, i agree.

It may be huge in your area - however, i am certain there are parts of this country where none of the extreme actions you have posted take place.

Even Julie Rugg wrote that landlords have been "demonised" and your writing in this manner further perpetuates that.....

I read your articles on landlordlaw and see that you try to find a balanced solution to problems.

However i have come across housing advice officers who assume that every word that comes out of a tenants mouth is the truth and are unwilling to hear the other side. I have come across housing advice officers who simply dont know the law. I have come across housing advice officers who cannot even produce an accurate statement of outgoings to help in the preparation of a repayment schedule. I have certainly come across housing advice officers who have lied to me about a tenants previous tenancies.....

Just like all landlords are not demons... neither are all tenants angels.....

Ben_Reeve-Lewis

Yeah 5% is not a given figure, just a ‘for instance’ and yes my picture does seem extreme, but it is bound to given what I have to deal with. Actually I was thinking since my last post that we should separate ‘Rogue’ landlords from ‘Amateur’ ones. True rogues are small in number even though their actions are extreme, whereas amateurs are more widespread and act recklessly through frustration and ignorance, as I mentioned above.. And I totally agree about advisers often not knowing the law. I am also a freelance housing law trainer for the Chartered Institute of Housing and I am amazed as I go up and down the land delivering courses how little many staff know. Mainly this is due to the organisation having no training budget so people often have to pick things up anecdotally.

I don’t agree that I am demonising landlords as you suggest. I am just reporting what is going on out there. I also said in my post that most incidents are brought on by the behaviour of the tenants in the first place. One thing I hate about my job is having to threaten decent landlords with prosecution when many times I am actually on their side and understand their frustration. I try to help them out of the mess rather than come on strong

So many people get into landlording on a casual basis without realising what it involves and then get themselves into an awful mess when they get the tenant from hell. I haven’t actually prosecuted a landlord since 1997, I prefer to find creative solutions, I even help them fill in notices and possession applications so they don’t waste time or money….even the rogue ones.

Sorry for hijacking the post OP. I’ll shut up now haha