Statutory Periodic Tenancy

Trebor01

Hi all,

My last tenant stayed past the agreed tenancy end date which I believe means she entered into a statutory periodic tenancy ?

She left about 7 days into the following months rental period and failed to provide any notice to me in writing or otherwise as to when she intended to leave, but simply advised me that she had gone and that was that.

I had served notice on her that I wanted her to leave 3 months in advance in writing and in an email.

Rent was paid on a monthly basis.

My question is:

Am I entitled to claim for 1 months rent from her under the implied status of a statutory periodic tenancy, and if so are there any pit falls I need to watch out for if I make this claim under small claims ?

I am aware of the following ;

Notice by Tenant

Where the tenancy has become a Statutory Periodic Tenancy (where the fixed-term has ended and no new agreement signed for another fixed-term) the tenant must give the landlord notice if he wants to leave:

The notice must be in writing
It must be delivered at least 4 weeks before the notice period ends or 1 month if rent is paid monthly
It must bring the tenancy to an end at the end of a full rent period.

G_M

Oh my god another thread trebor?

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3457839

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3462095

I assume this is the same tenant? Same dispute? or should I say same spam?

lived

G_M - what is your problem with these threads...? If you don't have anything to add why comment....?

G_M

As I said on a previous thread:

skimmed through the other thread I can see why this new one was started: OP was not getting the answers he wanted so hopes he'll get different answers this time, by posing the question slightly differently.

but you're probobly right. I'll refrain.

may_fair

Trebor01 wrote: »

My last tenant stayed past the agreed tenancy end date which I believe means she entered into a statutory periodic tenancy ?

If this was an AST tenant and she didn't vacate at fixed term expiry, then yes, a statutory periodic tenancy would automatically arise on the day after fixed term expiry.

She left about 7 days into the following months rental period and failed to provide any notice to me in writing or otherwise as to when she intended to leave, but simply advised me that she had gone and that was that.
...
My question is:

Am I entitled to claim for 1 months rent from her under the implied status of a statutory periodic tenancy, and if so are there any pit falls I need to watch out for if I make this claim under small claims ?

The T must give at least one month's notice and it must expire at the end of a tenancy period. The tenancy periods begin the day after the fixed term expired, and their length is based on the frequency with which rent is payable. E.g. if the term was six months commencing 15th January, with rent payable monthly, then the SPT would begin on 15th July with tenancy periods running 15th - 14th of the month.

Using this theoretical example, if the T vacated on 22nd August, she would be liable for rent in lieu of notice up to 14th October (because that is the earliest her notice could expire if she had given notice on 22nd August).

Trebor01

Mayfair - perfect thank you ever so much.

lived

GM - And it appears to have worked !!!

Great answer from May_fair which actually helps me to, so thank you May_fair.

anselld

However, if you have already served notice the T does not need to give notice but simply leave on the required date. So in order to claim a further month you would need to prove that the T stayed beyond the notice date.

Trebor01

anselld - Yes I can prove the tenant stayed beyond the notice date.

Colincbayley

anselld wrote: »

However, if you have already served notice the T does not need to give notice but simply leave on the required date. So in order to claim a further month you would need to prove that the T stayed beyond the notice date.

No, that is not correct.
If a valid notice was served, stating that the LL required the property to be returned, then it would have stated after XYZ date.
In this case, the tenant can lease without given notice to the LL as the LL has already provided notice to the tenant.

I really don't see what the point of this thread is, the OP wanted the property back, they got it!!

moromir

Colincbayley wrote:

I really don't see what the point of this thread is, the OP wanted the property back, they got it!!

By the sound of the other threads - its tit for tat - the OP didn't get the answer he wanted at dispute resolution and by the look of it is now trying to have the tenant for another month's rent to make up for it?