Buyer wants to rent until completion

basil92

LandyAndy wrote: »

I don't think I'd consider it. The chances are it would be fine but what happens if having given her possession she pulls out of the sale, refuses to pay rent and trashes the place before you can regain possession?

^^^ This but I would NOT EVER consider it.

It happened to people I know and ended up costing them thousands in legal fees as well as a lot of worry and stress....It would seem the supposed buyer/ renter never intended to buy the property:(

Pewit

JQ. wrote: »

Quite right - a Tenancy at Will is for commercial property. If you let a residential property it will automatically be for a minimum term of 6 months and the tenant will automatically gain all the security of the L&T Act.

Actually a Tenancy at Will is not only for commercial property (although it is more common in commercial property).

For example if a tenant remains in occupation of premises at the end of a lease term, the tenancy automatically becomes a Tenancy at Will.

It's not used in residential property often because it gives little security of tenure.

I can't post link (even though I've been a forum member since 2006! :mad:) but there are references in Wikipedia and property sites.

Pewit

Emmzi wrote: »

do you have a buy to let mortgage, landlord insurance, a gas safety certficate?

I am mortgage free. I have landlord insurance and a gas safety certificate as I had let the property before I put it on the market to sell.

Emmzi wrote: »

do you know how long and how much it costs to evict?

That depends on the contract with the tenant. I am considering a Tenancy At Will contract which requires no notice of termination by either party.

Emmzi

but still requires an eviction process if it goes wrong.

However, you seem to have already decided it is what you are doing so jolly good luck.

chappers

there have been a few threads regarding letting to potential buyers and the concensus has been not to due to the contract involved, I don't believe you need to enter into a letting contract.
I was nearly in a similar situation earlier this year and our solicitor proposed letting the buyer live in the property under licence, this involved the exchange of contracts with a specific clause to the licence requiring extra security(in this case £5000) and that if the buyer stayed beyond a certain date without completing then a penalty would be incurred at £250/day with the total security surrenderable after 10 days.
Exchange of contract should be sufficient as you hold the buyers deposit and should they not complete then that would foprfeited

JQ.

Pewit wrote: »

Actually a Tenancy at Will is not only for commercial property (although it is more common in commercial property).

For example if a tenant remains in occupation of premises at the end of a lease term, the tenancy automatically becomes a Tenancy at Will.

It's not used in residential property often because it gives little security of tenure.

I can't post link (even though I've been a forum member since 2006! :mad:) but there are references in Wikipedia and property sites.

Nope, it does not become a Tenancy at Will, it remains an AST with a rolling break and subject to all the security provided by an AST.

Out of interest, what was the purpose of this thread? Your agent has told you not to do it, everyone here has told you not to do it, yet you still plan to do it.

What has your solicitor said and why are they not drawing up the contract with the tenant? You've said the letting agent is drawing up a 2 week contract, but it won't be a 2 week contract it will be a 6 month AST, you can't do a residential letting for less than 6 months, no matter what you state in the actual contract. The whole purpose of the introduction of AST's was to stop Landlord's putting unfair terms in letting contracts, such as short notice periods. The standard terms of an AST will always overrule the contract.

I agree with one of the posters above that if you've exchanged it should be fine, if not, then you're mad. Whatever you do, you should be getting legal advice - I really can't imagine a good solicitor would allow you to do this if you've not exchanged.

jjlandlord

Pewit wrote: »

That depends on the contract with the tenant. I am considering a Tenancy At Will contract which requires no notice of termination by either party.

You cannot have such a tenancy with a residential, individual tenant in England or Wales.
Even if the contract states so, by law it will still be an assured shorthold tenancy, which the landlord cannot unilaterally end unless executing a court order.

JQ. wrote: »

You've said the letting agent is drawing up a 2 week contract, but it won't be a 2 week contract it will be a 6 month AST, you can't do a residential letting for less than 6 months, no matter what you state in the actual contract.

That's not correct.
An AST can be of any duration. The caveat is that the landlord cannot get a court order for possession through the s.21 route during the initial 6 month...

tbs624

Pewit wrote: »

For example if a tenant remains in occupation of premises at the end of a lease term, the tenancy automatically becomes a Tenancy at Will.

No, no it does not. "Wikipedia and property sites"? - gawd bless 'em.;)

tbs624

Wickedkitten wrote: »

What if this chick moves in, decides she doesn't want to buy it, and ends up as a squatter? Personally I wouldn't do it.

Agree with your general point but note that if this potenatial buyer was granted a tenancy agreement and stayed on she would not become a "squatter". Search the forum for Suzy Butler.....

missile

Pewit,

I do hope you will appreciate the risk you would be taking. It seems your buyer is in no hurry. Once the "tenant" is in residence what would prevent them from delaying completion indefinitely?

The buyer is trying it on. If she really wants to there is no reason why she cannot complete before the 08th.

If you are terrified of losing the sale, you could offer to fund an extra month in her current rental or find and pay for temporary accommodation.