Urgent Help. Break Clause/Notice Period. Help please!!!

krib

Hi, can someone please help me with this:

My partner and I have been renting a property. Our original "Tenancy Agreement" was for 1 calendar year and contained a 6 month Break Clause with a notice period of 2 months.

After our calendar year was up we decided to renew for another year and have now been in the property for another 3mths (end december). The agent had provided us with a signed Renewal paper which they called an 'endorsement', when we renewed in september, which says that:

QUOTE
"the property is being let for a further 12months upon the same terms and conditions as in the original agreement SAVE THAT:

Break Clause: The agreement will also be varied as follows: The tenant may terminate this agreement by giving one month's notice in writing. This notice must expire on the 28th of a month this being the last day of a period of the tenancy". UNQUOTE

The problem is that we have given them this notice today but the landlord is saying that the 6month break clause also applies to the renewal. Is this really so?? I mean the renewal paper says one month so i cant see why they insist its 6mths again!! We have been in the property for a year and 3mths now.

Can anyone give me some advice please?

Many thanks!
Kris

real1314

seems pretty clear to me.

give notice today (or before 28/12/06) leave by 28/01/07.

The Landlord could try to sue under the "terms" of the contract but I'd say they wouldn't have a hope in hell of winning. IMHO.

rosysparkle

Given the wording of the 'renewal paper', I don't see that the landlord can enforce a longer notice period. He'll have to argue with the agency, which is not your problem. You should be able to give notice up to the 28th Dec to leave on 28th Jan 07.

krib

Thanks a lot guys! Im just praying you're right!

Bossyboots

I hate to be a party pooper, but as I read it, the only thing in respect of the break clause that has changed is the reduction of the period of notice you have to give. The endorsement states that everything else is the same save for the variations noted. Ergo, there is a further six month break clause but now you only have to give one months notice, not two.

krib

Bossyboots wrote:

I hate to be a party pooper, but as I read it, the only thing in respect of the break clause that has changed is the reduction of the period of notice you have to give. The endorsement states that everything else is the same save for the variations noted. Ergo, there is a further six month break clause but now you only have to give one months notice, not two.

You have a very good point but the wording says the tenant may "terminate this agreement" by giving one month's notice in writing. It does not mention the 6 mth break clause again. So i wonder if it can be interpreted this way too since the new endorsement superceeds the previous AST.

Thanks for your input and eye-opener!

Bossyboots

krib wrote:

You have a very good point but the wording says the tenant may "terminate this agreement" by giving one month's notice in writing. It does not mention the 6 mth break clause again. So i wonder if it can be interpreted this way too since the new endorsement superceeds the previous AST.

Thanks for your input and eye-opener!

Can you dig out your original agreement and post the exact wording of the break clause. It is going to come down to interpretation and the original wording is going to be important.

As it stands, your renewal clearly states the original agreement stands subject to the changes. I would be expecting your original to say that you could "terminate this agreement" by giving two months notice. If that is the case then the 6 month clause still stands as it is overwhemingly clear that the only wording being changed is the reduction of notice period. However, if the original suggests the six month clause is only on the first agreement you might have a case to argue.

krib

Bossyboots wrote:

Can you dig out your original agreement and post the exact wording of the break clause. It is going to come down to interpretation and the original wording is going to be important.

As it stands, your renewal clearly states the original agreement stands subject to the changes. I would be expecting your original to say that you could "terminate this agreement" by giving two months notice. If that is the case then the 6 month clause still stands as it is overwhemingly clear that the only wording being changed is the reduction of notice period. However, if the original suggests the six month clause is only on the first agreement you might have a case to argue.

Hi thanks for all your help, really appreciate it.

The original Break Clause says:

QUOTE
BREAK CLAUSE: Should the Landlord or the Tenant wish to terminate this Tenancy prior to the completion of the term (as detailed above), either party may give notice to the other, in writing; such notice to be a minimum of two months' and which may not expire until or after six months of the tenancy have elapsed. Also, this notice must expire on the last day of a period of the Tenancy being the (27th) day of any month. UNQUOTE

Where it says 'as detailed above' it refers to the 'term' which is defined as a period of 12mths. Also, the wording of the renewal endorsement, unlike the original AST, says that tenant's notice "must expire on the 28th of a month this being the last day of a period of tenancy". So this wording says it can expire on any month as long as its the 28th, no?? It does not state it must expire on/after 6mths as in the original tenancy. So doesn't this wording superceed the previous AST?

The thing is we have fulfilled our 6mths in the original period. We had told the agent upon renewal that we dont want to be bound for another 6mths again - we had made in clear verbally and they said its fine we will only need to give one month. But now it seems they screwed us over! I mean if we leave at the end of January, as we wish, we would have done 4mths so its only 2mth really for the 6mth re-fulfillment. But i guess the landlords will insist on those 2mths too.

Thanks again!

Kris

real1314

From that it seems that it wasn't a 6 month "break" clause - i.e one that could be exercised on 6 months but not after that, as it would then run 12 months, but it was in fact a break available at any time after 6 months.

"...which may not expire until or after six months..."

so, you could have given 2 months notice after 4,5,6,7,8,9 or 10 months and it would have ended the agreement after 6,7,8,9,10,11 or 12 months respectively.

As the extension has no new period of 6 months, that has gone. You have extended the original agreement and therefore a new period of 6 months cannot start.
It may be worth getting some advice from CAB / local council housing to cover yourselves, but I can't see the LL winning in court.

krib

real1314 wrote:

From that it seems that it wasn't a 6 month "break" clause - i.e one that could be exercised on 6 months but not after that, as it would then run 12 months, but it was in fact a break available at any time after 6 months.

"...which may not expire until or after six months..."

so, you could have given 2 months notice after 4,5,6,7,8,9 or 10 months and it would have ended the agreement after 6,7,8,9,10,11 or 12 months respectively.

As the extension has no new period of 6 months, that has gone. You have extended the original agreement and therefore a new period of 6 months cannot start.
It may be worth getting some advice from CAB / local council housing to cover yourselves, but I can't see the LL winning in court.

Thanks Real for your reply.

So as you are putting it, since the renewal document we signed does not mention a new 6mth period then we are not obliged to stay those 6mths.
So they cannot turn round and say actually since you renewed the old agreement that automatically means the 6mth is again in place! I ask this because the renewal doc says "under same terms and conditions" as previous agreement.

Thanks

krib

Hi

Agent is insisting that the original 6 months Break Clause is again in force in the renewal agreement. They say that this is so because the renewal paper says at the top "Renewal to original agreement". The landlord is as pleased as pie and said that we have to do the full 6 mths.

Any advice? I find this unfair that the agent suddenly sides with the landlord. So what is the SAVE THAT clause in the renewal form worth??

Thanks
Kris