Unscrupulous Landlords...

tootz

Just one other question...can we make a claim against our landlord for damage to our possessions? (And if so, how). Pretty much all of our stuff is damp or covered in mould...

BitterAndTwisted

That would be something for which you would need to make a claim on your own contents insurance for, I think.

Wings

At the outset you should have raised the matter with your LL, when the repairs were not carried out within a reasonable time. Then you would write again to your LL, informing the same that unless the repairs were carried out within the next 10 days, you would enlist your own contractors to carry out the works, deducting the costs for the same from your next rental payment/s.

A section 8 Notice may be served upon the tenant/s in part by the LL, when a tenant/s is more than two (2) months in rental arrears.

A section 21 may be served by a LL on a tenant/s, by the LL giving the tenant/s two (2) months Notice, that Notice no earlier than two months from the ending of the fixed term of a tenancy, so for a six month tenancy, upon the fourth rental payment date of the tenancy.

Whilst Shelter, CAB will assist the OP, my preference would be for the OP to contact either the Environmental Health Department or the Housing Advice Department at the OP's local Authority Council's Offices.

Any assistance the OP requires under the Housing Act 2004 Deposit Scheme, then please pm me.

clutton_2

in order for him to throw you out he has to give you 2 months written notice in a specific format. You dont have to leave. He will then have to apply to the court for a possession hearing... you may wait several weeks to get a date, which may be several weeks ahead. Attend court and explain your situation and ask for as much time as you can get - another 6 weeks... even then you dont have to leave... the LL will then have to buy a Bailiffs Warrant and the Bailiffs are busy and they will take another 3-4 weeks before coming to repossess the property for the LL.. So if you have not had a SEction 21 yet, then it may well be the end of March before you have to leave......

Wings

clutton wrote: »

""Please note as mentioned previously your landlord cannot legally evict you until and unless your deposit is in one of the three protection schemes.""

i dont think this is quite right.... a Landlord cannot issue a Section 21 notice to quit if the deposit is not protected.?

Correct, so the LL could simply register/protect the Deposit today, and on the same day issue a Section 21 Notice. Recent landmark High Court Judgements have stated that it is at the time of ANY court hearing into non protection of a Deposit, or Section 8, 21 Notice, that a LL is the non registration/protection of Deposit will be considered, decided upon.

tootz

Our tenancy is due to end it's 6 month agreement on 5th February. He has verbally told us that he wants us out by then. Does he need to put it in writing too? Incidentally... our deposit is held by him, and not an agency.

anselld

tootz wrote: »

Our tenancy is due to end it's 6 month agreement on 5th February. He has verbally told us that he wants us out by then. Does he need to put it in writing too? Incidentally... our deposit is held by him, and not an agency.

I think this is all answered variously above....
Valid S21 must be served to end the AST at the 6 month point.
Deposit must be protected for the S21 to be valid.
Court order must still be obtained before you have to leave.
Witholding rent improperly will give LL more options to evict.

Wings

tootz wrote: »

Our tenancy is due to end it's 6 month agreement on 5th February. He has verbally told us that he wants us out by then. Does he need to put it in writing too? Incidentally... our deposit is held by him, and not an agency.

If it is a FIXED term Assured Shorthold Tenancy Agreement, then your landlord has already put in writing (in the AST) that the tenancy ends on 5th February, so really does not need to put this in writing again to you. You can out of peace of mind request your landlord to confirm that the AST ends on 5th February, or you can even write to the landlord on the 6th January giving ONE months Notice that the AST (tenancy) ends on 5th February. Please note the 6th day being the day in the month the AST commenced, and the same day your rental payments are due/paid.

PasturesNew

Wings wrote: »

If it is a FIXED term Assured Shorthold Tenancy Agreement, then your landlord has already put in writing (in the AST) that the tenancy ends on 5th February, so really does not need to put this in writing again to you.

Yes he does. A proper Section 21... although he may have already issued it close to the start of the tenancy and the tenant might have overlooked it/shoved it with the AST in the cupboard and not realised.

If he hasn't issued a proper written notice, then now he's too late and if he does one today then the earliest leaving date he could put on it would be 5th March as the two month clock doesn't start ticking until the next rent date.

Wings wrote: »

You can out of peace of mind request your landlord to confirm that the AST ends on 5th February, or you can even write to the landlord on the 6th January giving ONE months Notice that the AST (tenancy) ends on 5th February.

The tenant has to give no notice whatsoever if they will be leaving on the 5th/at the end of the AST. It is, of course, politeness to do so and 99.99% of people do.

The tenancy ends when the tenant has handed over the keys to the LL, so it is important the tenant moves out on the 5th and has solid plans on how to hand those keys over on the 5th too, preferably getting something in writing to say they did.

N79

tootz wrote: »

To clarify.
We have an assured shorthold tenancy agreement, which has been altered to agree that we are allowed to teach from here. We have public liability insurance to cover us for this. It is our sole source of income. Our deposit is held by the landlord. What procedure do we need to follow for rent withholding? We've waited months for work to be done (in fact since we moved in).

Edit: This post has ended up somewhat long. Sorry.

I'm sorry but I am certain that legally you do not have an AST (and hence most of the excellent advice in this thread may not apply).

Your tenancy falls within part 2 of the LL and T act 1954 (ie it is a commercial tenancy). The definition of tenancies to which part 2 applies is

"this Part of this Act applies to any tenancy where the property comprised in the tenancy is or includes premises which are occupied by the tenant and are so occupied for the purposes of a business carried on by him or for those and other purposes." (S23 Para 1 of the LL and T act 1954 - my bolding)

As you can see, this act applies to properties which are both residential and business in nature. The defining case in terms of applying this act is Cheryl Investments -v- Saldanha [1978] in which Lord Denning (perhaps the greatest English judge of the last century) tried to provide some practical examples of which tenancies would be residential and which would be business. In this case, the T was trying to get their tenancy declared a business tenancy. Here are his four examples (with my comments in bold):

"There was much discussion before us as to the meaning of the Business Tenancy Act (I use those words because I think 'Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, Part II' is a little confusing), especially the word 'purposes' in section 23(1); and the time or times at which those 'purposes' had to exist; and the effect of a change by the tenant in the use to which he put the property. Could he take himself in or out of the Act at his option? I found all these matters so confusing that I do not propose to attempt a solution today. I am only going to take four simple illustrations to show how the statute works; for they will suffice for our present cases.

First, take the case where a professional man is the tenant of two premises: one his office where he works; the other his flat, conveniently near, where he has his home. He has then a 'business tenancy' of his office; and a 'regulated tenancy' (today this would be an AST) of his home. This remains the situation even though he takes papers home and works on them at evenings or weekends and occasionally sees a client at home. He cannot in such a case be said to be occupying his flat 'for the purposes of' his profession. He is occupying it for the purpose of his home, even though he incidentally does some work there: see Sweet v Parsley [1970] AC 132 at 155 per Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest.

Second, take the case where a professional man takes a tenancy of one house for the very purpose of carrying on his profession in one room and of residing in the rest of the house with his family, like the doctor who has a consulting room in his house. He has not then a 'regulated tenancy' at all. His tenancy is a 'business tenancy' and nothing else. He is clearly occupying part of the house 'for the purposes of' his profession, as one purpose; and the other part for the purpose of his dwelling as another purpose. Each purpose is significant. Neither is merely incidental to the other. (This would seem to apply in your case - hence you have a "business" tenancy)

Third, suppose now that the first man decides to give up his office and to do all his work from his home, there being nothing in the tenancy of his home to prevent him doing it. In that case he becomes in the same position as the second man. He ceases to have a 'regulated tenancy' of his home. He has only a 'business tenancy' of it.

Fourth, suppose now that the second man decides to give up his office at home and to take a tenancy of an office elsewhere so as to carry on his profession elsewhere. He then has a 'business tenancy' of his new premises. But he does not get a 'regulated tenancy' of his original home, even though he occupies it now only as his home, because it was never let to him as a separate dwelling, unless the landlord agrees to the change."

Why does all of this matters? It matters because Schedule II of the Housing Act 1988 Section 4 specifically excludes "business" tenancies from being ASTs.

This means that the normal provisions for ending an AST by either the T (at the end of the fixed period without notice, with 1 month notice during any periodic tenancy) and the LL (2 months notice, not before the end of the fixed period) do not apply. Section 21 does not apply. The tenancy will not become a statutory periodic tenancy when the original tenancy expires. All the terms in the tenancy with regard to notice apply exactly as they are written.

Fortunately, since the property is mainly a house, there is, in my opinion, no question that S11 repairing obligations do apply to this tenancy but, of course, your LL may disagree.

Way forward:

If you want to leave, you need to read your tenancy for any notice clauses and stick to those (or mutually agree something with the LL - they may be happy to apply the AST rules in ignorance of the real situation but get their agreement in writing).

If you want to force repairs then you can use the Lee Parker vs Izzet route already mentioned by PrinceofPounds.

If you want to stay then you will need a new tenancy. "Fortunately" you have much stronger protection under the LL and T Act 1954 than you would if you had a residential tenancy (in most cases the LL is obliged to offer a renewal) should you wish to go down this route.