Renewing Tenancy Agreement £70

BobProperty

littlemissmoney wrote:

Thanks Bob. Is that also true during my fixed term?

Pretty sure not, that's why it's called fixed. I'm out of the landlording these days so my info may be out of date. This is a good place to check http://england.shelter.org.uk/advice/index.cfm

BobProperty

prudryden wrote:

Bob - Can you provide me with the name of the case? e.g. name vs. name Any links to any reports? Greatly appreciated!!

No, it came out in a landlords training course I did several years back.

Mrs_pbradley936

thescouselander wrote:

Never heard of that. In every place I have rented, after the initial 6 months only one months notice is required from the tennant to move out.

You may well be right I just always assumed it was two months. I am sure it says that on all my agreements and as I said in an earlier post I use an agent to make sure all the legal bits are complied with.

Gold_Shogun

BobProperty wrote:

It might seem fair but IIRC it was held in a court case that it's 2 months by the landlord and 1 month by the tenant, again IIRC once it goes periodic.

Sorry Bob, but your quote & follow-up posts are misleading, as it's almost correct BUT is incomplete, so the FULL quote should be :-
"It's 2 months by the landlord and 1 month by the tenant, UNLESS a longer period is mutually agreed in the Original AST / SAT Agreement"

Therefore, assuming the original notice period on both sides (as specified in the original agreement) is (for example) Two months, then the Two month period remains applicable when-&-if the AST / SAT becomes a Periodic Tenancy at the end of the original term.

I believe that also answers "Prudryden's" & "littlemissmoney's"queries on the posts following "BobProperty's" (about the two-month "codicil").

Also, reading through this thread kinda horrifies me at the attitudes of some Landlords & Agents ... Like 'BobProperty' I'm also a LL and I refuse to use agents as they are often untrustworthy & unreliable for BOTH sides.

I create & prepare all my own Agreements, Variations, & Notices and generally charge £50 for the initial Agreement (more as a means of quickly eliminating the timewaster & deadbeat applicants), but I NEVER charge for my renewal agreements as (A) it takes me about 4 minutes to change the dates & figures & reprint, and (B) when I have a "good" tenant I won't rip them off as a good tenant is worth more to me than a few quid in the short term.

When I have particularly "great" tenants, I like to give them a "free week" over Xmas & the new Year period every year, as I find this creates a huge amount of goodwill and acts as an incentive for the tenants to want to stay (and for longer).

Cheers
AnotherBobInProperty

Hubert_Dalrymple

It is deeply worrying that agencies are charging these renewal fees and that tenants think that renewing gives them protection for the whole of the term.

In assured shorthold tenancies, which is essentially pretty much the only kind of private tenancy available, both Landlord AND tenant ONLY have protection and security of tenure for the duration of the initial fixed period. The industry standard of fixed period is the statutory minimum, 6 months, though it can be any length up to (I think) 7 years.

After that initial fixed period has expired, there is nothing to prevent the landlord from chucking you out at any time (with the requisite 2 months' notice), whether or not you have "renewed". Similarly, the tenant is not obliged to remain in the property and is not liable for rent if he leaves the property at any time after giving the contractual notice period (usually 1 month).

After the initial period, the tenancy will simply "rollover" on a periodic basis until either party terminates it. This means that it continues on the same terms as the original tenancy from month to month, quarter to quarter or year to year, depending on how often rent is paid under the contract.

As you can hopefully see, this means that the renewal fee and the "new" contract is simply not worth the paper it is written on and is a dirty scam by dodgy agents.

I should make it clear that, while I am a lawyer, none of the foregoing should be taken as legal advice and simply represents my personal opinion.

prudryden

Scenario: Original contract calls for 2 months notice by either party. Rent is paid monthly. During the periodic period - which would prevail? The original 2 months notice by the tenant or 1 month notice, as the tenant pays monthly. Many thanks for your post. Greatly appreciated.

Hubert_Dalrymple

I think that if your tenancy says that you need to give 2 months' notice, that would continue after the fixed term. Unless the landlord consents or inserted a break clause in the original contract, the tenant could not terminate during the fixed period in any event, so the issue of notice would only be relevant after the expiry of the fixed term, therefore the parties must have meant the provisions regarding notice only to apply after the expiry of the fixed term.

However, I may well be wrong...

rosysparkle

Hubert_Dalrymple wrote:

It is deeply worrying that agencies are charging these renewal fees and that tenants think that renewing gives them protection for the whole of the term.

In assured shorthold tenancies, which is essentially pretty much the only kind of private tenancy available, both Landlord AND tenant ONLY have protection and security of tenure for the duration of the initial fixed period. The industry standard of fixed period is the statutory minimum, 6 months, though it can be any length up to (I think) 7 years.

After that initial fixed period has expired, there is nothing to prevent the landlord from chucking you out at any time (with the requisite 2 months' notice), whether or not you have "renewed". Similarly, the tenant is not obliged to remain in the property and is not liable for rent if he leaves the property at any time after giving the contractual notice period (usually 1 month).

After the initial period, the tenancy will simply "rollover" on a periodic basis until either party terminates it. This means that it continues on the same terms as the original tenancy from month to month, quarter to quarter or year to year, depending on how often rent is paid under the contract.

As you can hopefully see, this means that the renewal fee and the "new" contract is simply not worth the paper it is written on and is a dirty scam by dodgy agents.

I should make it clear that, while I am a lawyer, none of the foregoing should be taken as legal advice and simply represents my personal opinion.

Are you stating that a fixed term extension to an AST isn't valid in law?

prudryden

rosysparkle wrote:

Are you stating that a fixed term extension to an AST isn't valid in law?

Sorry - I'm not following. Where did you see that?

rosysparkle

Hubert_Dalrymple wrote:

After that initial fixed period has expired, there is nothing to prevent the landlord from chucking you out at any time (with the requisite 2 months' notice), whether or not you have "renewed".

<snip>

As you can hopefully see, this means that the renewal fee and the "new" contract is simply not worth the paper it is written on and is a dirty scam by dodgy agents.

Where I've bolded it, plus the later comment about renewals being not worth the paper.