Any rights on a verbal tenancy agreement?

dtsazza

Our tenancy agreement is due to run out shortly, and as we wished to renew it we asked the landlord about this. He wished to put the rent up, and proposed a new price to which we agreed. This was all done by email a few weeks ago, and he said he would send us the new tenancy agreements.

This morning we received a message that he wants to talk to us again about the rent. After checking with neighbours who share our landlord, he did the same thing with them and increased their rent by £500/month! That's not very appealing.

It may or may not be relevant, but in the interim after agreeing the new rent we have sent a month's payment at the previously-agreed upon rate.

It's a bit of a longshot, but - do we have any rights based on the email exchange which agreed to 12 months continued tenancy at a specific rent? I've heard that "verbal contracts are legally binding", but IANAL. Alternatively, since it's the landlord's job to draw up the agreement (for us to sign) and he's been dragging his feet, is there any recourse on that path? If he had offered the formal contracts shortly after our agreement, we would have gladly signed them.

BitterAndTwisted

Why do you think that an email exchange constitutes a verbal contract?

dtsazza

On the assumption that it's at least as strong as a verbal contract, since it's a verbal contract "in writing". Legally, I would assume that verbal contract broadly encompasses any kind of situation where one party has committed to something verbally, but there are no formally admissible documents to support this. I know that emails don't have the same legal standing as letters for some reason, but I'd be surprised if they had less standing than phone calls.

But then, I don't actually know, which is why I asked.

jjlandlord

dtsazza wrote: »

it's a verbal contract "in writing".

Basically a contract in writing, then? :rotfl:

G_M

Semantics aside (it's written, not verbal if it's an email!) it appears you have a contract. You reached an agreement on rent, you've paid the new rent, and the LL has (presumably) accepted the new rent.

If the new contract is/was not binding (or if the LL argues this and you decide to go along with it) you could simply decline the amended new offer, and jus stay in the property. The day after your current fixed term expires you will have a periodic tenancy at the OLD rent provided:
1) no new agreement has been reached (see above) AND
2) you stay in place AND
3) you continue to pay (the original) rent.

The LL then has the choice of
1) doing nothing and letting you stay OR
2) raising the rent on your periodic tenancy by following the correct procedure OR
3) giving you s S21 Notice (2 months notice) and seeking to evict you OR
4) further negotiating an agreement with you

may_fair

dtsazza wrote: »

I've heard that "verbal contracts are legally binding", but IANAL. Alternatively, since it's the landlord's job to draw up the agreement (for us to sign) and he's been dragging his feet, is there any recourse on that path? If he had offered the formal contracts shortly after our agreement, we would have gladly signed them.

Short term tenancy contracts don't have to be in writing; nor do they have to be in the form of a formal, signed tenancy contract.

A contract can be an exchange of emails (or a phone call) where LL says "I offer you a 12 month renewal @ £x per month starting on Monday" and T says "Okay that's fine by me".

The purpose of having a formal, signed contract is to [attempt to] eliminate any area of potential dispute or misunderstanding about what has been agreed whereby T might say, 'actually I thought you meant the Monday after next' or later claim that they thought utilities were included etc.

While all short term tenancy contracts which fulfill the criteria for a contract (offer and acceptance, consideration, intention to create legal relations etc) are legally binding, if there's a dispute it's obviously much harder to prove precisely what was agreed when the contract is oral, or in casual written form.