Landlord doesn't sign contract and pulls out last minute

LeoC

This is a hypothetical situation but I like to be prepared.

We are renting a new flat, we put the traditional deposit (2-weeks notice) and we signed a piece of paper with the details of the tenancy agreed (how much per week, term, etc). This also states (as typical) that if we decide to pull out, we lose our deposit, however the landlord can pull out at any point (and give back our deposit).

So now we have passed the credit checks and it's all ready to go, we are supposed to move in on 01/06.

However, legally, the landlord can pull out for any reason up to the point where they sign the contract, and EA said they are not signing until the day of getting the keys on 01/06 (when we also have to sign).

So now to my question - if the landlord pulls out the day before, and returns our deposit, can we seek compensation? Because we won't have time to find another place to rent before out current tenancy agreement where we now live expires...

I am worried because the landlord is not signing the contract already and pushing it to only sign last minute. Perhaps they want to sell? they used to live there before - it's now empty - perhaps they want to move back in?.

Anyone has any experience on this? It all sounds very one-sided and biased to the side of the landlord, as I can't push them (by saying "either sign this week or we are pulling out") because we can't pull out!

Thanks.

BitterAndTwisted

LeoC wrote: »

However, legally, the landlord can pull out for any reason up to the point where they sign the contract, and EA said they are not signing until the day of getting the keys on 01/06 (when we also have to sign).

So now to my question - if the landlord pulls out the day before, and returns our deposit, can we seek compensation?

No, you can't as there was no contract between the two parties. Therefore neither side owes the other anything.

Because we won't have time to find another place to rent before our current tenancy agreement where we now live expires...

That would not be your prospective landlord's fault as they would have had no control over any decisions you may have chosen to make.

I am worried because the landlord is not signing the contract already and pushing it to only sign last minute. Perhaps they want to sell? they used to live there before - it's now empty - perhaps they want to move back in?

Usually, if the agent is not getting the keys until the first of June this would suggest that the property is currently occupied and they're waiting for confirmation that the outgoing tenant has indeed left. Only the suicidally reckless would sign a contract that they weren't 100% confident that they could honour. As it's empty I suspect they may be hanging on to see whether they can find another tenant willing to pay more rent than you have agreed to. If they can't, it will be yours. Why haven't you asked them what the problem is about not signing the agreement ahead of your moving-in date?

Anyone has any experience on this? It all sounds very one-sided and biased to the side of the landlord, as I can't push them (by saying "either sign this week or we are pulling out") because we can't pull out!

Thanks.

No, you can't pull out because you've made a decision that some might consider a tiny bit premature. I understand why you're worried because you should be, but that's not to say that it's guaranteed that there's anything sinister going on on their parts.

jjlandlord

IMHO it would depend on whether a contract has been formed, bearing in mind that this can occur even if landlord has not signed tenancy agreement.

we signed a piece of paper with the details of the tenancy agreed (how much per week, term, etc). This also states (as typical) that if we decide to pull out, we lose our deposit, however the landlord can pull out at any point (and give back our deposit).

This could be a written contract depending of the wording.

Werdnal

Have you already given notice on your current property? Or has LL given notice to you?

Sadly, whilst it will obviously cost more, for peace of mind it is wise to secure and sign a new tenancy before you give notice on the existing one. I appreciate paying an extra month at the old place whilst still paying on the new one can be beyond some people's means, but atleast you have a safety net if things like this do go wrong.

As an aside, have you asked to see a draft copy of the tenancy agreement you are going to sign on 1 June BEFORE the day? You should, as TA's can be quite complex and confusing, and you need time to read and understand it - once it is signed, you are bound by whatever it says. Trying to comprehend it fully whilst a LL/LA is hovering over you offering you a pen, is never a good idea!

PasturesNew

Most of them seem to do this, it's quite a shoddy way of conducting business and it never used to happen back in the 80s/90s.

It's a HUGE gamble. You're gambling being homeless unexpectedly, worldly goods in the back of your car outside -v- actually having a home.

It's this reason that makes me fear entering into any AST because paying an overlap is unaffordable for most people.... and a rip off.

Rich people will tell you: Oh, don't give notice on your current place until you know you've got the new one... but that could potentially have you paying almost 2 months' overlap rent... and certainly one month at very least (if you were lucky)....

LeoC

Thanks for the comments. We are giving ourselves 1 month overlap, but our current tenancy expires on 01/07, so if we don't get the new place on 01/06, we'll only have one month to find a new place, and quite a few of the new ads (I'm still following the market just in case) show that new flats coming up are only available after 01/07, so it would be really hard for us to find a new place in just a month!

The reason we are moving also is that our current landlord increase our rent by 10% (and it was already high) so we definitely can't afford to stay here!

The reason the EA said the landlord is not signing is because they are busy, travelling, etc, and furthermore they want to know "why do we insist that they sign before the keys are given?". When I explained that the landlord might pull out any moment, they told us to "trust us, it's all fine, they are signing as soon as they have the time".

And the contracts are all ready to go, they already sent us the TA filled in and told us to "sign and return as soon as possible", even though the landlord is not. So again, they want to pressure us to have it all signed, but the landlord is not in a hurry to commit!

We paid the asking price (so I don't think they want any money) but when we asked for a 6-month break clause they got suspicious ("why do we want to leave after 6 months?"). It's just a precaution, I'm not sure if that's what is keeping them back?

Anyway, I just think the whole process is too one-sided and I believe I read somewhere that the law doesn't like one-sided agreements and contracts?

BitterAndTwisted

Forget what you believe about the law being one-sided. It is what it is and you can't do anything about that.

If push comes to shove and you don't get to sign the contract for this new property just stay where you are until you find a suitable alternative. What you should do is to contact your current landlord as soon as that happens and tell him you won't be moving out on the original date you gave them. Nothing can compel you to give up possession of the property you are renting now short of a court-order and it could take your current landlord months to acquire one.

jjlandlord

Though it does not occur instantly, I understand that getting a possession order against a trespasser is in general quicker.
A landlord can start court proceedings for such an order the day after a tenant's notice expires.
The distress for rent law is also still on the statutes book, which means that in principle the (ex-)landlord can demand twice the previous rent as compensation. Though it remains to be seen if courts grant this.

LeoC:
As mentioned whether you have a contract does not necessarily rely on the landlord signing the tenancy agreement.

BitterAndTwisted

The OP already sounds like a worry-wart heading for an ulcer so I don't necessarily think it's helpful to mention possession orders against trespassers. In real life that's extremely unlikely to happen. Most especially if the doors of communication between the two parties is open and used.