Landlord charging 'handover fee' for moving out?

DVardysShadow

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

It doesn't matter whether there is any dirt or damage currently: the charge is to check whether there is or not.

You have a choice: either continue to meet your contractual obligations or pay this modest fee to be released from it. The landlord is under absolutely no obligation to release you from the contract you co-signed.

Actually OP could unilaterally give notice on the tenancy, which would end it for all of the others too [although it might be a bit late now to take that option]

BitterAndTwisted

I agree that the OP could unilaterally give notice but as they said they were living with friends I doubted that they wanted to go down this route. It would still mean a check-out charge plus a brand new rental agreement being drawn up with those costs added as well, and that's for people who don't want to go.

In the grand scheme of things a £75 charge seems quite reasonable imo

dimbo61

If all the deposits are returned and new agreements drawn up who pays for the time,paperwork etc!
it costs to register the deposits in the first place so getting out of your contract for £75 is cheap.
The lalndlord could ask for you to pay for the rest of the tenancy and take you to court for non payment.
Do you want a CCJ on your credit file ?

G51shopaholic

dimbo61 wrote: »

If all the deposits are returned and new agreements drawn up who pays for the time,paperwork etc!
it costs to register the deposits in the first place so getting out of your contract for £75 is cheap.
The lalndlord could ask for you to pay for the rest of the tenancy and take you to court for non payment.
Do you want a CCJ on your credit file ?

Did you actually read what the OP said?

Lease ended in july 2011 - so NO BREACH of contract could take place. Tenant doesnt have to pay any "get out" fee as none exsists.

As someone else suggested the tenant should read the terms of the contract very carefully as it may be hidden in there somewhere. If no - no pay.

£75 is just a pure rip off from the agent!! Others I noted in my 7yrs as a Letting Manager (and note none of these were charged by the company I worked for) were

Move-in fee
Move-out fee
Admin fee - this is ok IF agent actually does their job and carryout proper reference checks.

Tenant should not have needed to find a replacement and in doing so saved on advertising fees for landlord. So the saving should come back to him & his friends.

prowla

Surely a check would implicitly be required as part of a tenancy, and therefore there is no justification for trying to charge for it.

BitterAndTwisted

Under the normal course of events it is usual for the landlord to pay for the check-in and the tenant/s the check-out.

DVardysShadow

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

Under the normal course of events it is usual for the landlord to pay for the check-in and the tenant/s the check-out.

There is no usual about this. It is what is defined in the contract.

Ulfar

If it was me, I would serve a months notice. This would definitely terminate the OP's contract with the landlord, no messing about with deeds of variation or charges for another tenant coming in to replace them. It also means that the deposit would need returning less any damage deductions which should be apportioned between all of the tenants. It would also end the tenancy for all tenants.

If the other old tenants plus the new one and the landlord want to sign a new contract that is for them to sort out.

If however the landlord doesn't want to go through all this fuss and as others have said he has saved on advertising for a new tenant, DPS fees, LA agent fees then maybe he should foot the bill for doing things the hard way.

G_M

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

I agree that the OP could unilaterally give notice..

I'm sure this chestnut has come up before and I should know but brain not working......

If one joint tenant gives notice to end a Periodic, but after the requisit month the other joint tenant(s) fail to vacate, has the tenancy ended?

If so, what is the status/security of the remaining 'tenants'?

If not, presumably the tenant who left still has joint and several liability....?

Ulfar

By giving notice unilaterally the tenant ends the tenancy for all.

It is then up to the landlord to take action, depending on what action is taken will govern what liability there is.

I feel that the tenant in this case would have a good defence should the landlord try to go to court to recover losses, firstly because he has complied with the notice, secondly because the remaining tenants plus the incomer want to enter into a new legal agreement and thirdly the tenant has done all he could given to abide by the law.