House mate changing his mind about moving out - contractual problems - help!

RAS

Daneel wrote: »

I think S's actions are due to paranoia that he won't get his desposit back from J when he moves out. The LA has advised us that as this is a contract extention, we have to sort out the deposit amoung ourselves, and the deposit they are holding will stay where it is. There is no inventory check or other such procedures being conducted, and they are not charging a fee.

It seems we are at the mercy of S's whim, and I am not sure what I can do if he doesn't move out. I don't see how we can pay rent until S moves out because:

If I was K or J I would be seriously worried about your landlaords understanding of the law. When K and J leave the LL will be required to return the deposits to L and S by law.

With which scheme is the deposit registered?

anselld

I would agree, LA has no idea either.
The only way it can POSSIBLY be an extension is if L, S, K and J have all signed a deed of variation to hand over the existing tenancy. In which case S will effectively become a squatter.

jjlandlord

anselld wrote: »

I don't think (2) is true. Any joint tenant can terminate individually if notice is correctly served.

Only once a statutory periodic tenancy has started.

At the end of the fixed term, either all the joint tenants leave or a statutory periodic tenancy will arise with all the joint tenants as tenant (since the tenant of the SPT is the same as the tenant of the fixed term tenancy, as per statutes).

DVardysShadow

jjlandlord wrote: »

Only once a statutory periodic tenancy has started.

At the end of the fixed term, either all the joint tenants leave or a statutory periodic tenancy will arise with all the joint tenants as tenant (since the tenant of the SPT is the same as the tenant of the fixed term tenancy, as per statutes).

The point of contention is whether notice served for the end of a fixed term is served for Statutory or Contractual notice. Plainly 1 tenant can terminate a joint and several Statutory Periodic Tenancy. The only debate is whether the notice can take effect immediately and prevent an SPT or whether it can only take effect a month later.

Daneel

RAS wrote: »

If I was K or J I would be seriously worried about your landlaords understanding of the law. When K and J leave the LL will be required to return the deposits to L and S by law.

With which scheme is the deposit registered?

The LA has said that when the new tenants move in / the new contract is in force, they will change the names registered with the deposit scheme. I'll have to check which one it is with.

Edit - It's mydeposits.co.uk

jjlandlord

DVardysShadow wrote: »

The only debate is whether the notice can take effect immediately and prevent an SPT or whether it can only take effect a month later.

It cannot prevent an SPT. The only way to prevent an SPT is for the tenant (ie. all the joint tenants) to surrender by the end of the fixed term.

Daneel

DVardysShadow wrote: »

The point of contention is whether notice served for the end of a fixed term is served for Statutory or Contractual notice. Plainly 1 tenant can terminate a joint and several Statutory Periodic Tenancy. The only debate is whether the notice can take effect immediately and prevent an SPT or whether it can only take effect a month later.

Ok, that is interesting. So worst case, if I just want all of this over, I alone can end the tenancy a month after the end of the fixed period by giving notice? That would mean that S's ability to screw this all up is limited to a month after the end of the contract date?

Googlies_2

For there to be a Statutory PT, Tenant(s) must be the same, it seems one has changed.

BitterAndTwisted

Despite all of the contractual complications the easiest way to satisfy S about their deposit is for the new incoming tenant to pay their deposit directly over to S. Where there is more than one person on a tenancy the deposit will be protected with MyDeposits under the name of the "lead tenant" who is the party to whom the whole of the deposit will be returned at the end of the tenancy, and it is for for them to distribute the monies to the other parties.

Nothing bad will come of this old/new tenancy agreement until and unless there are rent-arrears. As long as there are no rent-arrears there can be no issues as to liability.

Daneel

Googlies wrote: »

For there to be a Statutory PT, Tenant(s) must be the same, it seems one has changed.

Yes, but it's not reflected in contract, currently both the old and the new are wrong in terms of named tenants vs. who is in the house. So where does that leave us?