kicked out for Olympics - AST - s.21 notice - break clause

chewmylegoff

Whilst some of the advice about refusing to leave may well be legally correct I'd personally be somewhat reluctant to play that game given that you might need references in the future.

You could at least see what the landlord wants in terms of extra rent. If your ret hasn't gone up since you first moved in it then it may not be an awful deal for you to agree a new 12 month term at a slightly higher amount (after all, if you sit there and wait to be evicted, you're going to have to find somewhere to live and if you will have to pay more elsewhere anyway due to an increase in market rate then you might as well just suck it up now).

The alternative view is that your LL is a bit of a knob and you might as well just get out now and find somewhere else that isn't owned by a bit of a knob.

jjlandlord

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

And nobody exposes themselves to the risk and costs of legal action and/or bad references.

There's no incentive for the landlord to start eviction proceedings here.

If LL wants to play, OP should play hard, he's got the stronger hand.

theartfullodger

jjlandlord wrote: »

Indeed, the effect of the notice is to end the fixed term tenancy, but as you said a statutory periodic tenancy will replace it immediately if you do not move out.
This does not mean that your landlord will have to serve you further notice: After the expiry of the s.21 notice, provided it is valid, your landlord will be entitled to start court proceedings to evict you, that's all...
...

Indeed: This question has been discussed a few times over at Landlordzone ...
and, as jj wisely says, even if the break clause is valid then the break clause only ends the fixed term, with, SPT continuing on after that break if tenant remains in occupation. see this quote from Westminster over at LLZ...

The effect of the LL's notice under the break clause would be to end the fixed term tenancy at notice expiry, however, if you are in occupation at notice/fixed term expiry, then a statutory periodic tenancy (a.k.a. rolling contract) will automatically arise, replacing the fixed term tenancy. In other words, the tenancy would effectively continue.

..So, if LL issues proceedings for possession based solely on the break clause those proceedings, as long as defended, should fail. (Say this takes 4 weeks, probably optimistic). Landlord then realises he has to issue another, new S21 to end the SPT. (Say 10 weeks..). He then has to start possession proceedings again, gets possession order, Tenant still declines to leave, gets Bailiffs, tenant finally leaves (probably 6 weeks, maybe optimistic??). Total time after expiry of anyway-suspect break-clause 20 weeks, around 5 months, Mid December 2012.... Landlord also probably has the problem of "holiday tenants" who will have paid BIG TIME for Olympic rental and find they've been conned - and hopefully sue LL (All together now, ah, bless...).


Seems to me the Landlord set this tenancy up deviously simply to cash in on Olympics... that a tenant then decides to exercise his legal rights to remain till mid December is morally at the very least no worse than his LL, arguably morally better.

However, there is an argument for negotiation with LL (but not before late June...). Landlord may be potentially at risk of loosing shed-loads of money & having agro etc etc.. So, late June point LL at this thread, point out his exposure... and propose he house tenant(s) and their belongings temporarily (?? where?? they'll be no available London rentals or hotel rooms..) at his expense, for 2 or 4 weeks, plus disruption costs & travel excess, tenancy to be re-started at end on same terms for another 12 months.. Or simply say "Yes I'll go but for £xxk..". I realise this approach is fraught with difficulties for all parties..

That way perhaps LL & T may both make money out of the Olympics (unlike the rest of the country for which the Olympics seem to be a black 'ole of a money pit, travel disruption, missiles going on top of a friends rental flats, even bigger queues at Heathrow and daft concerts by over-the-hill faded pop groups I'd forgotten existed (Duran who??).. )

Cheers!

Artful

jjlandlord

theartfullodger wrote: »

So, if LL issues proceedings for possession based solely on the break clause those proceedings, as long as defended, should fail. (Say this takes 4 weeks, probably optimistic). Landlord then realises he has to issue another, new S21 to end the SPT. (Say 10 weeks..).

My understanding is that the LL served a s.21 to activate the break clause, as is possible.
As such there's no need to serve another notice if the first one is valid.

But the break clause is potentially an unfair term, which if accepted by the court would invalidate the s.21.

As said, even with the already served notice, IMHO the LL has no chance to get the property back in time unless OP plays nice.
I see no reason to play nice unless the LL gives something in exchange...

Fuzzyness

chewmylegoff wrote: »

The alternative view is that your LL is a bit of a knob and you might as well just get out now and find somewhere else that isn't owned by a bit of a knob.

thats exactly how i feel about my current landlord and the position he has put us in.

theartfullodger

jjlandlord wrote: »

My understanding is that the LL served a s.21 to activate the break clause, as is possible.
As such there's no need to serve another notice if the first one is valid.

But the break clause is potentially an unfair term, which if accepted by the court would invalidate the s.21.

As said, even with the already served notice, IMHO the LL has no chance to get the property back in time unless OP plays nice.
I see no reason to play nice unless the LL gives something in exchange...

Apologies, jj correct, my bad...

Panda78

I live in the Olympic zone too and rent privately. OP if your council is Waltham Forest, they are offering assistance for people who feel their LL is ending their contract due to the olympics. If the LL is within their rights, i guess there is not much the council can do, but perhaps they will help you look for another place to live. Worth contacting them, i had a leaflet through my door about a month ago from the council, saying we should contact them if we are concerned about our tenancy.

mchale

jjlandlord wrote: »

If LL wants to play, OP should play hard, he's got the stronger hand.

Possibly, but remember when LL gains possession whats to stop him/her suing tenant for cost's incurred.

jjlandlord

mchale wrote: »

Possibly, but remember when LL gains possession whats to stop him/her suing tenant for cost's incurred.

He can't. Any cost award will be made by the court hearing the s.21 notice case. If no hearing (accelerated procedure) cost awards are strictly capped to a low amount.