Tenancy notice

CHARLEENE

ViolaLass wrote: »

Why shouldn't it? Is it in your way?

No its not in my way...but its not up for let until the 25th April remember..it works both ways!

ViolaLass

CHARLEENE wrote: »

No its not in my way...but its not up for let until the 25th March remember..it works both ways!

They're not going to let it earlier than that, they're just looking for someone to let it to from 25th April (or March, or whenever it is you're leaving). I don't see your point really. They're just doing their job and not encroaching on your right to live there in the mean time.

Wee_Willy_Harris

CHARLEENE wrote: »

No its not in my way...but its not up for let until the 25th March remember..it works both ways!

And the quicker it's let after the 25th March, the better it suits you. As you say, it works both ways!

G_M

CHARLEENE wrote: »

No its not in my way...but its not up for let until the 25th March remember..it works both ways!

It's not vacant and available for rental until .. (26th April wasn't it?).

That doesn't mean the LL can't advertise before then. And as said above, viewings are at your discretion.

This thread has become very confrontational - perhaps reflecting the LL's attitude I don't know.

But in most cases these processes don't need to resort to the legalities. Amicable arrangements are far better.

Tenant says they want to leave on or around X date. LL advertises. Tenant allows viewings within reason at convenient times. LL finds new tenant. Old tenant leaves on convenient date irrespective of the legal notice period wih LL's agreement. LL cleans/repaints/repairs property and new tenant moves in.

It is only when one side or the other insists on 'rights' that the other side does likewise and then the law comes in to play, protecting both sides by saying what must be done.

CHARLEENE

G_M wrote: »

It's not vacant and available for rental until .. (26th April wasn't it?).

That doesn't mean the LL can't advertise before then. And as said above, viewings are at your discretion.

This thread has become very confrontational - perhaps reflecting the LL's attitude I don't know.

But in most cases these processes don't need to resort to the legalities. Amicable arrangements are far better.

Tenant says they want to leave on or around X date. LL advertises. Tenant allows viewings within reason at convenient times. LL finds new tenant. Old tenant leaves on convenient date irrespective of the legal notice period wih LL's agreement. LL cleans/repaints/repairs property and new tenant moves in.

It is only when one side or the other insists on 'rights' that the other side does likewise and then the law comes in to play, protecting both sides by saying what must be done.

But they have already arranged a viewing which wasn't really convieniant..and then the person never showed!!

ViolaLass

They're allowed to arrange viewings. You're allowed to refuse them. It's not that complicated.

dodger1

B_Blank wrote: »

I would argue dignity is more important than money. I would have the dignity to fore-warn other tenants of a money grabbing landlord because I couldnt live with myself if I said everything was brilliant and a tenant got locked into a deal with such an individual. Just like I wouldnt sell a car under false pretences, I wouldnt grease the wheels of a rental agreement under false pretences to meet my own objectives.

Some of us still have our morals and dignity in tact.

I really feel sorry for charleene about this situation.

So you would warn possible tenants that this LL acts lawfully. I think most possible tenants would be pleased to have a LL that does things the correct way.

CHARLEENE

CHARLEENE wrote: »

No its not in my way...but its not up for let until the 25th March remember..it works both ways!

Sorry meant April...just so upset by it all...might now lose my next tenancy so may be homeless

CHARLEENE

dodger1 wrote: »

So you would warn possible tenants that this LL acts lawfully. I think most possible tenants would be pleased to have a LL that does things the correct way.

So no tenacy agreement for two years...no boiler service for 3 years and the electrics are illegal is legal???

00ec25

CHARLEENE wrote: »

So no tenacy agreement for two years...no boiler service for 3 years and the electrics are illegal is legal???

please read the shelter website so you know your rights going forward to your next rental rather than repeatedly bleating about "how was i supposed to know" - the same way we all learn - we find out for ourselves - very easy these days , its called the internet, after all you found this forum

you have ALWAYS had a contract. Until 2009 it was a formal AST - you signed it so you could have kept a copy yourself. After 2009 you had a Statutory Periodic Tenancy, the clue is in the title - the terms are laid down by law and supercede anything written in a tenancy agreement - again fully explained on the shelter website

there is no legal requirement to service the boiler. There is a legal requirement to has a safety certifciate IF there is gas in the property - if the boiler is gas it needs a safety certifcate, that is not the same as a service. I agree the boiler could be safe but inefficient if it is not serviced and yes that would indicate a "poor" LL

explain why the electrics are illegal? are you a qualified electrican?

was your deposit protected? Which scheme was/is it in and have your read that scheme's rule if you disagree if the LL attempts deducting any money from it