Landlord will not accept our Notice to Vacate

pooch

This thread appears to have gone a bit off topic.

Perhaps the OP should make a new thread asking the original question again?

pmlindyloo

G_M wrote: »

I CAN ADD NOTHING ON YOUR RIGHTS ABOUT NOTICE THAT i DID NOT SAY IN POST 10 ( WHICH i EVENTUALLY FOUND AFTER FAFFING AROUND!) OF YOUR EALIER THREAD

Here.

(and yes, I'm shouting)

Naughty, naughty

OP - G_M is a well respected poster so please don't take his 'shouting' to heart.

We regular posters easily forget that 'newbies' won't know the 'ins and outs' of how the forum works, unlike those of us who seem to 'live on here'!

Don't let it put you off posting.

No offence G_M

Kynthia

OP, if you don't return the keys on or before the last day of your tenancy it can be argued that you are still liable for rent. Therefore the suggestion of returning them to the agency by hand with an independant witness is a good one. Then raise a dispute for the return of your deposit if they try to keep it to pay the rent for their 'mistaken' second month. Taking dated photos of the property yourself is good and if the check out is a long time after you left you can argue that certain items they are claiming for were done after you left the property.

Just to check, did you give notice in writing and it was received on or before the last day of the previous tenancy period?

geri1965_2

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

That's idiotic: your situation is all of a piece. I think it's very unfair to start a new thread for every single question that pops into your head and expect other posters to either remember what you've asked before or to search your posting history to have the whole picture in front of them.

The person is new, give them a break.

cvt1

If you weren't given written details of tenancy protection, the LL or his agent, has broken the law. It is the LLs responsibility to do this and you can apply to the county court for a remedy in this. Localism Act 2011 has corrected some errant higher court decisions on this matter.

It is a well known fact that agents want two months notice, in order to be able to re let the property. If your contract says two months, then you can be held to it, because you signed and agreed to it.

However, if you've given one months notice, then the LL should really let it be. If you leave on the day yhe notice ends, then really, they should let you go. Agents use this purely for their own gain and the LL also gets another months rent, whilst the property is being marketed. I think it's sharp practice and am forever negotiating with agents in this one.

Yorkie1

cvt1 wrote: »

If you weren't given written details of tenancy protection, the LL or his agent, has broken the law. It is the LLs responsibility to do this and you can apply to the county court for a remedy in this. Localism Act 2011 has corrected some errant higher court decisions on this matter.

It is a well known fact that agents want two months notice, in order to be able to re let the property. If your contract says two months, then you can be held to it, because you signed and agreed to it.

However, if you've given one months notice, then the LL should really let it be. If you leave on the day yhe notice ends, then really, they should let you go. Agents use this purely for their own gain and the LL also gets another months rent, whilst the property is being marketed. I think it's sharp practice and am forever negotiating with agents in this one.

Please could you cite your source for saying that statute can be overridden by contract?

cvt1

Statute does not imply one months notice, it sets out the minimum as being one month to comply with the Protection from Eviction Act. Therefore, if a tenancy period is one month,the tenant must give a minimum of one months notice.

DVardysShadow

Fett132 wrote: »

Hi! Yes I have read the responses, but I didnt want to ask a new question in the same thread (I thought that was sort of frowned upon?)

A new question from the original poster on the old thread is very much smiled upon. It means that we don't have to go scrambling across the site for the context and no one is put to the bother of linking to the old threads.

What is frowned up is 'thread hijacking', where someone posts a new and only vaguely related question on a thread with someone else's problem, leading to mixed up conversations and trawling through stuff which has largely been resolved for one poster only to find it is a new poster with an unrelated problem. Such posts tend to get fairly substantially ignored.

DVardysShadow

Fett132 wrote: »

Heres the basic rundown of it:

We are on a Statutory Periodic Tenancy.

Letting Agent tells us we have to give two months notice. The contract also states:

"If the tenant remains in the property beyond the end of the initial fixed term no new fixed term Tenancy will necessarily come into being. If the Landlord agrees, the tenant can have a continuing implied tenancy on the terms and conditions granted here within and those granted at the discretion of the Landlord"

I have read this out to an agent from Shelter and they have advised that regardless of what the contract states, if we are in a Statutory Periodic Tenancy then we must only give one months notice. The contract cannot change this law.

The one thing you really need to be sure of is that you are actually on a Statutory Periodic Tenancy and not on a Contractual Periodic Tenancy.

If the contract is clearly worded as to what happens after the fixed period, including specifying notice, then you may be on a Contractual Periodic Tenancy. The words quoted are sufficiently vague as to preclude them overriding a Statutory Periodic Tenancy arising [In My Opinion] - in essence if the contract explicitly states the terms are at the whim of the Landlord - and the clause you have quoted does, then I believe that a Statutory Periodic Tenancy would arise by default.

Now where you could get caught out is if there are other clauses which define a Contractual Periodic Tenancy, where tenure and notice are agreed explicitly differently from the terms of a Statutory Periodic Tenancy.

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

Consistent requests for our DPS Repayment ID despite us telling them it is confidential.

It is confidential and I would make mention of this in your letter to the landlord/agent, so the arbitrators can get the measure of these shysters..

This is important. Do it in a proper letter and keep a copy

jjlandlord

cvt1 wrote: »

Statute does not imply one months notice, it sets out the minimum as being one month to comply with the Protection from Eviction Act. Therefore, if a tenancy period is one month,the tenant must give a minimum of one months notice.

Protection from Eviction Act 1977 says a minimum of 4 weeks, not 1 month.
Common Law says a minimum of 1 tenancy period (exceptions for long periods like 6 months or 1 year)

I have read this out to an agent from Shelter and they have advised that regardless of what the contract states, if we are in a Statutory Periodic Tenancy then we must only give one months notice. The contract cannot change this law.

The Shelter guy is clearly wrong: A contract cannot change the law, but that does not mean that it cannot create a periodic tenancy such that no statutory periodic tenancy will ever arise.


However, the clause you quoted does not do much imo and is probably not drafted a by a professional. So yes SPT it is.