What if landlord wants me to leave but I don't want to

therevelator

Hi, in the hypothetical scenario above, what would happen?

What I mean is that if my landlord wanted me to leave and did not have a good reason (i.e. tenant always paid rent on time and property was well maintained by tenant), and I didn't want to leave, what can the landlord do about it?

This also assumes the landlord doesn't want to sell the property.

G_M

Are you a tenant or a lodger?
Are you in Eng/Wales or Scotland? or N Ireland?
What kind of tenancy do you have? AST? Protected?
Did your tenancy start before 1989? 1997?
Do you have a fixed term contract, or periodic (monthly)?
When did your tenancy start?
What was the term?
Has the LL given you notice? What kind (S21?) ?

It all makes a difference to the tenant's rights.
Give us full details, we'll give you a full answer!

taxsaver

He can apply to the court for an eviction order which, provided the LL has followed all the correct procedures, the court has to give. It all takes time so will buy you a few extra weeks/months but you will eventually be evicted and might then also find yourself liable for all the LLs costs in the action.

Generally it is better to accept and move on, if you are unable to discuss the position with the LL and reach an amicable solution. He must have a reason, but if he doesn't intend to sell it or use it himself (or for a family member) and you are indeed a good tenant, then maybe it's because he feels that he can get more rent than you are paying?

Mind_the_Gap

therevelator wrote: »

Hi, in the hypothetical scenario above, what would happen?

What I mean is that if my landlord wanted me to leave and did not have a good reason (i.e. tenant always paid rent on time and property was well maintained by tenant), and I didn't want to leave, what can the landlord do about it?

This also assumes the landlord doesn't want to sell the property.

Assuming an AST in England or Wales, the LL can require possession of his property using a section 21 notice and without having to give a reason, I'm afraid - even if you have been a model tenant.

G_M

Mind_the_Gap wrote: »

Assuming an AST in England or Wales, the LL can require possession of his property using a section 21 notice and without having to give a reason, I'm afraid - even if you have been a model tenant.

You are assuming a lot more than you say.

Without more information it is unwise to advise the OP.

therevelator

Are you a tenant or a lodger? Tenant.
Are you in Eng/Wales or Scotland? or N Ireland? England.
What kind of tenancy do you have? AST? Protected? Assured shorthold tenancy but it started in 2004 and hasn't been renewed, but I've remained in the property and so one assumes its terms are still 'live'.
Do you have a fixed term contract, or periodic (monthly)? It started off as a one year contract in early 2004, but hasn't been officially renewed since then.
When did your tenancy start? 2002 as a six month assured shorthold tenancy. A new contract was then drawn up in 2004 (see previous)
Has the LL given you notice? What kind (S21?) ? No, LL doesn't want us to leave. I'm just thinking hypothetically.

Thanks for the advice BTW.

sonastin

If you continue to be a model tenant and the LL decides he wants his house back, he has to serve a valid S21 notice to tell you he wants the house back. You can then move out on or before the date on the notice. If you choose not to, the LL then goes to court to ask them to give him his house back. The court then issues you an order to leave usually with a few weeks notice - 4 I think. If you don't leave at that point, the LL has to go back to the court to get an eviction order and then get the bailiffs round to turf you out on the street. At any point in that process you can leave but you can also be liable for the LLs costs in going to court and employing bailifs.

I've missed out some of the details but that is the gist of the process...

tbs624

therevelator wrote: »

What kind of tenancy do you have? AST? Protected? Assured shorthold tenancy but it started in 2004 and hasn't been renewed, but I've remained in the property and so one assumes its terms are still 'live'.
Do you have a fixed term contract, or periodic (monthly)? It started off as a one year contract in early 2004, but hasn't been officially renewed since then.
When did your tenancy start? 2002 as a six month assured shorthold tenancy. A new contract was then drawn up in 2004 (see previous)
.

Once that new (in 2004) fixed term tenancy expired your tenancy became a Statutory Periodic Tenancy, courtesy of the Housing Act 1988.

All the terms of the preceding F Term apply, except for those on "determination". ie how/when the tenancy may be lawfully ended by either party. LL must give you 2 months notice and you are obliged to give one month. Both must tie in with the period of the tenancy, unless agreed otherwise. If your Fixed term ended on , say, the 14th of June then each subsequent period runs from 15th to 14th of the following month ( assuming that rent is due monthly).

may_fair

therevelator wrote: »

Are you a tenant or a lodger? Tenant.
Are you in Eng/Wales or Scotland? or N Ireland? England.
What kind of tenancy do you have? AST? Protected? Assured shorthold tenancy but it started in 2004 and hasn't been renewed, but I've remained in the property and so one assumes its terms are still 'live'.
Do you have a fixed term contract, or periodic (monthly)? It started off as a one year contract in early 2004, but hasn't been officially renewed since then.
When did your tenancy start? 2002 as a six month assured shorthold tenancy. A new contract was then drawn up in 2004 (see previous)
Has the LL given you notice? What kind (S21?) ? No, LL doesn't want us to leave. I'm just thinking hypothetically.

Thanks for the advice BTW.

When a fixed term AST contract expires, if the tenant remains in occupation (and does not agree a renewal fixed term) then a statutory periodic tenancy arises automatically*. The terms in the expired contract carry through into a periodic tenancy e.g. rent payable as before, except for any provisions relating to notice.

If the LL wants to evict you he must firstly serve notice, then, when the notice expires, he can apply for a possession order.

The standard 'no fault' notice is a s.21 and this must give you at least two months' and also expire at the end of a tenancy period. It is not a notice to quit and does not end the tenancy nor oblige you to vacate at notice expiry.

If you are served with a s.21 notice then you can either:

1. do nothing, and wait for the LL to obtain and enforce a possession order, OR
2. serve notice to quit (at least one month, also expiring at the end of a tenancy period, and your NTQ does end the tenancy at notice expiry) OR
3. negotiate a mutually agreed surrender with the LL.

*Unless the contract provides for a contractual periodic tenancy following the fixed term.

moneybunny123

I'm sure I'll get attacked for saying this - but this thread makes me angry. As a Landlord (albeit a reluctant novice), this sort of attitude makes me want to scream.

If a Landlord asks a Tenant to leave, it should end there - why should he/she need an excuse? And why should the Tenant be able to dig his/her heels in and await a court order?

I cannot believe how flawed the law on renting is. I think that any Tenant that refuses to budge after their notice period and sits there waiting for a court order to evict them deserve to get the book thrown at them!!

If I hired a car for 24hrs and didn't bother to return it and instead continued to drive around in it until I was taken to court, nobody would have any sympathy for me. How is it any different?!

casper_g

moneybunny123 wrote: »

If I hired a car for 24hrs and didn't bother to return it and instead continued to drive around in it until I was taken to court, nobody would have any sympathy for me. How is it any different?!

How is it different? It's different because a tenancy can basically only be ended by both parties agreeing or by a court order.

As to why it is different, it just always has been. Tenancies are fundamentally different from any sort of hire agreement for a "thing" like a car, bike, TV, whatever, because the land and building a person lives in is fundamentally different from any of their other possessions, in law and in reality. It has always been regarded differently, and that's not about to change.

If you don't like the law on tenancies, then invest your capital in some other business, not renting out residential property.