Tenancy agreement question

jj182

I have a query regarding our tenancy and some issues which have arisen with our letting agent. We (my boyfriend and I) are currently renting a property under a fixed term tenancy agreement. We had been considering whether or not to renew our tenancy, and after receiving a letter recently stating that there would be a rent increase of £35 pounds, we decided to find somewhere else and that we would hand in our notice. Our tenancy was due to expire early October and we started looking mid July.

Our tenancy includes a 6 month break clause and states:
"The tenant shall be entitled to terminate this tenancy by giving notice to the landlord as follows:
The period of notice to be a minimum of two calender month
The notice can be served at any time during the tenancy term but the tenancy cannot be terminated until after the first six months of the term.
The notice will expire on the last day of the period of the tenancy and must be served in writing"

Ok so sorry to bore you with that, but basically our problem is that on the 26th of July we found somewhere perfect, available beginning of September, so we attempted to hand in our two months notice thinking we could move out two months from that date. However we were informed by the letting agent about the "period of the tenancy" so we would have to pay in full right up until the end.

Now my question is this, is the landlord (whom we have a pretty good relationship with) able to release us from this contract a little bit early, or is it, as our landlord has implied, a legally sticky business? I know its not much time but our rent is VERY high for a couple, and it would really make a difference to us to not have to pay for that extra 10 days. Also we feel the agreement was worded really badly. We read it and never even thought we'd be locked into until a specific date.

Thank you for reading and opinions would be much appreciated!!

roobyroo07

Your landlord can release you early. Usually they will ask you to pay your rent until a new tenant is found.

may_fair

jj182 wrote: »

...basically our problem is that on the 26th of July we found somewhere perfect, available beginning of September, so we attempted to hand in our two months notice thinking we could move out two months from that date. However we were informed by the letting agent about the "period of the tenancy" so we would have to pay in full right up until the end.

Now my question is this, is the landlord (whom we have a pretty good relationship with) able to release us from this contract a little bit early, or is it, as our landlord has implied, a legally sticky business?

Firstly, you need to understand that if you serve valid (i.e. complying with the contractual provisions of the break clause) notice under the break clause then legally the effect of your notice is to end the tenancy at your notice expiry.

Secondly, from the LL's POV, he cannot unilaterally end your tenancy other than by serving notice and obtaining/enforcing a possession order.

So, unless you end it by serving a valid notice under the break clause, then both you and LL would have to agree and execute a Deed of surrender. In short, yes, it's possible, but it requires legal formalities.

As LL says, it's a bit 'sticky' but not that difficult. It's just a document which would usually have to be drafted by a solicitor and be witnessed. But obviously the solicitor would need to be paid, so that's possibly the sticky point.

Having said all that, countless tenancies end in an informal, not strictly legal manner, without a hitch. But if the LL doesn't do it 'properly' it will expose LL to the possibility that an unscrupulous tenant will take advantage and falsely allege he has been illegally evicted.

Also we feel the agreement was worded really badly. We read it and never even thought we'd be locked into until a specific date.

I've seen a lot worse than this break clause. If you didn't understand the contract, and/or thought it was worded badly, then you should have paid a solicitor to check it first. Before signing it. You can of course later argue that the contract is unenforceable for various reasons but generally speaking, unless the contract is extremely unfair, you wouldn't succeed.

G_M

mayfair (and your landlord) are right about the 'sticky' business in a strict legal sense.

But having said that many (many!) tenancies are ended early, and not in accordance with break clauses, by mutual amicable agreement.

Provided both sides are happy to end early, whether it is after one months notice instead of the two required by the break clause, or perhaps mid-way through a 'period', then it can be done. It makes sense, for the avoidance of doubt/misunderstanding, to have something in writing as confirmation, but whether a solicitor is used for this....... probobly only in a minority of cases.

Indeed I suspect many judges would accept such a document unless things had become very unpleasant (mayfairs example of a claim for illegal eviction, or criminal harassment perhaps).

A lot depends of course on the tenant/LL relationship.

jj182

thank you for all your advice! I think had this not been managed though a (useless) letting agent it would probably have been fine. Mayfairs' answer confuses me a bit. Just to clarify, are you saying the notice I handed in wasn't valid because I wanted the tenancy to end midway through the period?

At least I've learned from this, I will ask the next letting agent / landlord an irritating amount of questions about everything next time. In my opinion, having to serve what is basically two and half months notice is a joke.

thank you again for your help!

clangnuts

It's worth considering in the future when a rent increase is requested, you can reject it. The loss to the Landlord of a void, for a small increase in rent is quite often just not worth it, especially if the landlord has a good, reliable tenant!

G_M

jj182 wrote: »

thank you for all your advice! I think had this not been managed though a (useless) letting agent it would probably have been fine. Mayfairs' answer confuses me a bit. Just to clarify, are you saying the notice I handed in wasn't valid because I wanted the tenancy to end midway through the period?

At least I've learned from this, I will ask the next letting agent / landlord an irritating amount of questions about everything next time. In my opinion, having to serve what is basically two and half months notice is a joke.

thank you again for your help!

Yes. Notice has to align with rental periods so if your renyt periods run from, say 3rd of the month to 2nd of the month, you need to give at least 2 months notice ending on the 2nd.

If you gave notice on 2th July, your 2 months would end on 2nd Oct.

As I said in my ealier post, there is nothing stopping you reaching an alternative agreement with the LL provided he agrees, and it should strictly be done by deed, but in practice most people just put the agreement in writing (ie a letter from the LL).