New Short-term tenancy agreement

chuffin_nora

Afternoon all
We are currently in discussions with our LA about signing a new short-term tenancy agreement. We have been on a periodic tenancy agreement since October 2010. However as part of their managed services arrangment they state that they ensure the tenancy agreement is renewed every six months. This clearly hasn't happened. On Saturday 7th July we visited the LA's office to sign the new agreement. However when reviewing the agreement we noticed that the commencement date of the agreement was the 30th April. When queried the LA said that it had to be this date due to the landlord's insurance. We left having not signed the agreement to get clarification on this point. Is this correct or should we insist that the term begins on the date the new agreement is signed?
Since then we have had the following clarification from the LA on the reasons for backdating the new agreement:
The renewal of contracts - The contracts will be required to be backed dated to the 30th April 2012 as all the contracts we do are for a 6 month period so therefore all renewals on a management service are required to be renewed in 6 month increments. Your first contract was dated for the 30th April 2010, you then renewed your contracts for a further 6 month period and then fell into a periodic due to administration error which we have admitted and are now trying to resolve as promptly as possible, hence why we have waivered the £35 renewal fee for this period of renewal which is payable by the tenants upon renewal as stated in your previous contacts.

Is there anyone out there who has been in a similar situation or anyone who can provide advice on where we stand. The ideal solution for us would be to sign a new six month agreement that actually is for the six month period rather than four.

jjlandlord

They are telling you b....ks. But are quite good are doing it with self-confidence.

You are not interested in the terms of the "managed service" they provide to your landlord.
You sign a new fixed term agreement only if you wish to be bound for another fixed term, and if you agree to the details.

As you seem to be agreeable to a new fixed term tenancy, you tell them that you will only sign a contract only if it starts immediately after the end of the current monthly period, and if they do not charge you anything (they already offered to 'waive' the charge).

Yorkie1

My view is that if you signed this [edit: with the backdated date], you could potentially be guilty of, or at the very least complicit in, fraud or false accounting.

The reason for the cover-up is to prevent the LL from losing the benefit of his LL's insurance cover / to enable the LL to retain his insurance cover despite not complying with its T&Cs.

The document would be false & misleading in a material respect, i.e. when it started, and I think you would be dishonest to state the wrong date.

Happy to see others' viewpoints though.

DVardysShadow

Yorkie1 wrote: »

My view is that if you signed this [edit: with the backdated date], you could potentially be guilty of, or at the very least complicit in, fraud or false accounting.

The reason for the cover-up is to prevent the LL from losing the benefit of his LL's insurance cover / to enable the LL to retain his insurance cover despite not complying with its T&Cs.

The document would be false & misleading in a material respect, i.e. when it started, and I think you would be dishonest to state the wrong date.

Happy to see others' viewpoints though.

I would disagree. T should sign backdated or not according to whether it suits T. T is not party to LL's insurance, stands to gain nothing from from backdating and it makes no material difference. As you know, if a tenacy is periodic, the T&C's are the same except for giving notice.

Frankly I think that the idea that this is anything to do with LL's insurance is spurious - any decent insurer will be up to speed on the idea of periodic tenancies and basically has no business in strong arming LL's into not letting tenancies go periodic.

This is the LA trying to re-establish the precedent for charging for renewals.

Hump

You can't sign a backdated rental contract - it's madness. You could sign one for 3 months from end of July to end of October, then resume 6 monthly contracts - but don't pay

DVardysShadow

Hump wrote: »

You can't sign a backdated rental contract - it's madness.

Of course you can. The backdating does not cause paralysis nor prevent the ink from flowing. The adverse effects are nil unless you are already breaching the backdated agreement. And the possible advantage is that it gives you 3 months assured tenancy.

G_M

The agents have c*cked up as the LL wanted them to get you to renew the fixed term when it expired. They are now trying to cover their !!!!!!. That is all. Insurance? I don't think so!

Signing a new fixed term tenancy is entirely volunetary - it is up to you. If you WANT the security of another 6 months, then yes, sign it but from today's date. That way you get a full 6 months security!

If you prefer the flexibility of a periodic tenancy, so you can give a months notice at any time - then don't sign. You are under no obligation to do so, so long as you understand that the flexibility acts both ways and the LL can give you 2 months notice at any time.

Unlikely though since the LL clearly wants you to stay!

More here.

Ulfar

What possible advantage is there for a tenant to sign a backdated tenancy, highly strange.