AST ending soon... how to change to periodic?

DVardysShadow

jjlandlord wrote: »

There's no common law issue here. As said the statute above is clear cut.

If the statute is that clear cut [which it is] and interpreted that clear cutly [which it might be], then a section 21 notice cannot be withdrawn either.

jjlandlord

DVardysShadow wrote: »

If the statute is that clear cut [which it is] and interpreted that clear cutly [which it might be], then a section 21 notice cannot be withdrawn either.

That's absolutely correct.
Until a new tenancy is expressly created the notice remains valid. There's a reason it's called a "Sword of Damocles"

I'm not saying that it's impossible that a court would find the notice invalidated, as outcome of court is always uncertain, but I would not bet on it. There's only one guaranteed way to remove a s.21 notice and that is to grant a new tenancy.

DVardysShadow

jjlandlord wrote: »

That's absolutely correct.
Until a new tenancy is expressly created the notice remains valid. There's a reason it's called a "Sword of Damocles"

So a tenancy cannot go SPT after a S21.

mystra

DVardysShadow wrote: »

So a tenancy cannot go SPT after a S21.

that's what i need to know

I'm really confused by all this now

jjlandlord

DVardysShadow wrote: »

So a tenancy cannot go SPT after a S21.

Yes it can. Please see my previous posts.

N79

I agree that, strictly legally, offering a new tenancy on its own does not invalidate a S21.

However, once a LL has offered a new tenancy then all the T has to do is accept the offer and a new tenancy is created - and the S21 invalidated. The Housing Acts do not require the replacement tenancy to be in writing.

Thus, the only safe approach for a LL who wants to evict is not to offer a new tenancy once a S21 is served. Any T who has received a S21 can defeat it my accepting an offer of a new tenancy verbally..

The LL relying on the S21 will then be in a very difficult position if the T can give credible evidence of the renewal - if the court gives the T even the slightest benefit of the doubt then the S21 is defeated and possession averted.

I would therefore conclude that the offering of a new tenancy places the LL in a position where it could be difficult to rely on their S21. (It is also bad practice in my opinion!)

N79

DVardysShadow wrote: »

So a tenancy cannot go SPT after a S21.

Yes it can - because the S21 does not end the tenancy - it merely allows the LL to use the possession procedures in S21. However, the issuing of a notice does not place any obligation on the LL to actually end the tenancy.

Absence the end of the tenancy, a SPT automatically arises.

mystra

N79 wrote: »

I agree that, legally, offering a new tenancy on its own does not invalidate a S21.

However, once a LL has offered a new tenancy then all the T has to do is accept the offer and a new tenancy is created - and the S21 invalidated. The Housing Acts do not require the replacement tenancy to be in writing.

Thus, the only safe approach for a LL who wants to evict is not to offer a new tenancy once a S21 is served. Any T who has received a S21 can defeat it my accepting an offer of a new tenancy verbally..

The LL relying on the S21 will then be in a very difficult position if the T can give credible evidence of the renewal - if the court gives the T even the slightest benefit of the doubt then the S21 is defeated and possession averted.

but i don't want to enter into another AST for the next 12 months (there is a break clause where i can give 2 months notice at 6 months, so that's another 8 months - which is too long). I just want to be able to stay an extra couple of months so i can take my time and move when financially viable.

I really don't want to get courts and stuff involved - LOL i just want an easy life :rotfl: - fat chance!

jjlandlord

N79 wrote: »

However, once a LL has offered a new tenancy then all the T has to do is accept the offer and a new tenancy is created - and the S21 invalidated. The Housing Acts do not require the replacement tenancy to be in writing.

Correct.
But obviously as usually the goal of the landlord is to have the tenant renew this would be the desired outcome (from LL's point of view).

N79 wrote: »

Thus, the only safe approach for a LL who wants to evict is not to offer a new tenancy once a S21 is served. Any T who has received a S21 can defeat it my accepting an offer of a new tenancy verbally..

The LL relying on the S21 will then be in a very difficult position if the T can give credible evidence of the renewal - if the court gives the T even the slightest benefit of the doubt then the S21 is defeated and possession averted.

Frankly, I do not see a court refusing possession just because the tenant claims that tenancy has been renewed orally. If so all s.21 would fail...
It relies on the balance of probabilities, not the "slightest benefit of the doubt".

jjlandlord

mystra wrote: »

I just want to be able to stay an extra couple of months so i can take my time and move when financially viable.

I really don't want to get courts and stuff involved - LOL i just want an easy life :rotfl: - fat chance!

Even in the worst case this should be no problem as we established that the notice included in your tenancy agreement is invalid.
Obviously you don't need to tell them it is invalid...