Making changes to an AST when it becomes periodic

Lilibee

Just a quick questions I'm hoping someone could help me with, as our letting agent has just confused me!

We have a 12 month AST that is due to expire in January 2012. LA just sent a letter asking what our plans are and offering to 'renew' (her wording) the tenancy by letting it go periodic - which is fine with us.

We are asked to confirm that this is acceptable and then they will respond to 'confirm this renewal and any altered terms.'

It's the bit in bold that is confusing me. I thought that any new terms (except a rent increase, using proper procedure) would require a new AST? Or can terms in the contract be altered when the fixed term expires and it becomes a statutory periodic tenancy?

Of course, they also seem to think that the periodic tenancy requires both us and the LL to give 2 months notice, and they want to charge £50+VAT for 'renewing' in this way, so it's probably just their incompetence but thought I should double check before I write back!

MFSaver

You are correct. The statutory periodic tenancy applies with no changes to the terms (except for the notice period for the tenant). Being a landlord and an ex-renter, i have never been in a situation where I had to "renew" a contract for periodic tenancy to apply

It's either incompetence, or them trying to get you and your landlord to pay additional fees for them photocopying a piece of paper.

theartfullodger

As MFS.. says - bleedin' agent after fees from you & Landlord

Unless YOU want the security of knowing you can't be chucked out for 6 or 12 months then a periodic is fine. As you say in periodic tenacies LL has to give min 2 months notice: Tenant only has to give one month - see...
http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/renting_and_leasehold/ending_a_tenancy_or_licence

Cheers!

Artful (Landlord..)

may_fair

If you are in occupation at fixed term expiry, a statutory periodic tenancy will automatically arise under section 5 Housing Act 1988.

Neither you nor LL need to give notice, nor pay a fee to the agent, for this to happen.

The terms in the expired contract carry through into the SPT, except for any provision relating to giving notice to end the tenancy.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/50/section/5

Lilibee

Thank you all for confirming what I thought.

I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt as it looks like a standard 'renewal' letter that they haven't removed the correct lines from, and write back saying we're happy to continue on a periodic tenancy and gently point out we don't expect to pay a fee as it's not a proper renewal.

DVardysShadow

Lilibee wrote: »

Thank you all for confirming what I thought.

I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt as it looks like a standard 'renewal' letter that they haven't removed the correct lines from, and write back saying we're happy to continue on a periodic tenancy and gently point out we don't expect to pay a fee as it's not a proper renewal.

Although the logic is correct, don't alert them to your intent not to pay them a fee. As this is the reason they will have sent the letter, it is going to come straight up on their radar. You need to stall and stay below their radar until you have stayed a day over the end of your fixed term and then you have a Statutory Periodic Tenancy. If you don't comply, they might send you a section 21 notice, but if you then ask for a new contract to sign and they send it, the section 21 is invalidated.

may_fair

DVardysShadow wrote: »

If you don't comply, they might send you a section 21 notice

If I were the landlord in this situation, I would not instruct the agent to serve a s.21 because T had failed to pay an unnecessary fee to the agent.

DVardysShadow

may_fair wrote: »

If I were the landlord in this situation, I would not instruct the agent to serve a s.21 because T had failed to pay an unnecessary fee to the agent.

The problem is not so much that the Landlord might do this, it is that the agent might do it in the name of the landlord. Landlords should perhaps look at the agent's fee structure and determine whether the agent can do better by kicking out the tenant and getting a new one in than by keeping the existing tenant. A bit OT, but relevant.

Lilibee

DVardysShadow wrote: »

Although the logic is correct, don't alert them to your intent not to pay them a fee. As this is the reason they will have sent the letter, it is going to come straight up on their radar. You need to stall and stay below their radar until you have stayed a day over the end of your fixed term and then you have a Statutory Periodic Tenancy. If you don't comply, they might send you a section 21 notice, but if you then ask for a new contract to sign and they send it, the section 21 is invalidated.

A good point, thanks for this. I will just ask them to clarify whether they are offering us an actual renewal, with new contract to sign, new fixed term etc, or whether they're just offering to let us stay on an SPT. Because the letter isn't clear and just contradicts itself!

I wouldn't actually mind signing for another fixed term, we have to be here for another year anyway as OH is halfway through a 2 year Masters so if needs be that's what we'll do.

I know that our LL would not be keen to kick us out, because his last two lots of tenants (found through same agency, btw) both stopped paying rent and bills then did a runner halfway through their tenancies, and both left the place in a mess. Our move in was delayed because of the damage caused by the last lot. So I think we're his first tenants in about 2.5 years to pay all the rent, on time and in full, and look after the house.

may_fair

DVardysShadow wrote: »

The problem is not so much that the Landlord might do this, it is that the agent might do it in the name of the landlord.

Yes, that's possible, but the agent couldn't then go on to apply for possession on the LL's behalf so ultimately it's in the hands of the LL, not the agent - and just serving the notice has no effect on the tenancy so it's not really a 'problem'.

DVardysShadow

may_fair wrote: »

Yes, that's possible, but the agent couldn't then go on to apply for possession on the LL's behalf so ultimately it's in the hands of the LL, not the agent - and just serving the notice has no effect on the tenancy so it's not really a 'problem'.

But probably 75% of tenants would go, no questions asked and Landlord none the wiser.

of the rest, for 15% the agent would get away with telling the landlord that tenants accrue too many rights if they are allowed to stay and the remaining 10% they would withdraw the s21 and say to the landlord 'sorry, guv, mistake in procedure due to our temp'