Landlord's actual address needed

G_M

The recent case of Beitov Properties v Elliston Bentley Martin [2012] UKUT 133 (LC) ruled that to comply with the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 any Notice served by a landlord must show the LL's actual address in order for the notice to be valid.

A 'c/o' address (typically a managing or letting agent) will not suffice.


See here.

This is something landlords should take note of, whether 'professional' or 'accidental', and is also worth noting by tenants.

Yorkie1

Actual case judgment here:
http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/LC/2012/LRX_59_2011.html

Some care needed in terminology, having examined the judgment and the statute.

The section only applies to 'written demands', defined in s.47(4) as "In this section “demand” means a demand for rent or other sums payable to the landlord under the terms of the tenancy".

Therefore it does not extend to all 'Notices'.

The section is further qualified in saying that if the written demand does not include the LL's address, then [edit: only] the service charge element of the demand is not payable until the correct information is supplied - implying that it's suspended rather than never payable. This is supported by the final para in the judgment.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1987/31/part/VI

G_M

Thanks for the link Yorkie1 (I couldn't find it!) and the further clarification.

Werdnal

G_M wrote: »

Thanks for the link Yorkie1 (I couldn't find it!) and the further clarification.

You'll be off to amend your 2 infamous and much quoted posts then ...

G_M

Werdnal wrote: »

You'll be off to amend your 2 infamous and much quoted posts then ...

Oh god.... I suppose so.... maybe tomorrow.....:(

gozaimasu

I have read through various threads on here relating to rent increases and the service of Notices and documents in writing to a tenant's address, but I have not found an answer to my question.

My landlord emailed back in November increasing the rent on my AST. I knew that an s.13 notice was required to do this, so I ignored it, and did not pay the increase this month. It was a 4% increase, which I thought was reasonable.

When this lack of payment was queried, I replied stating that an s.13 was required to increase the rent. An s.13 Form 4B was fired back by email, with an increased rent of 8% effective from March.

Should this have been served by post, and is there any info/legislation that requires the landlord to serve it by post?

My ultimate aim is to delay this increase for as long as possible so I really should have waited until the beginning of February to tell them that they needed an s.13 (total idiot, I had to tell them how to be a landlord, lol!).

If I can ignore it until March (i.e. not pay the increased rent when it is first due) then can I do so on the basis that they served it by email and not post?

propertyman

Email is an accepted form of service if the parties agree. That you have communicated on all matters including the reason for non payment of rent, I think you would be hard pressed to convince a Court that you can pick and choose.

I haven't one to hand- if it need be was it signed? Is it correct in all other respects?

have you checked the tenancy to see if the rent is automatically increased?

As creating a problem often results in termination perhaps you might move early. Or you can always got to the RAC to review the increase...

gozaimasu

The notice has been signed and looks like it was scanned in. The name of the other tenant has been spelled incorrectly (looks like a typo). Can anything be done about this...?

Email has been the preferred method of communication so far. Does this mean I would have to accept the service of an s.21 notice by email as well?

I was planning on referrring to an RAC, but I don't expect them to disagree with the 8% increase. Apparently (according to an estate agent) it is a rent in line with the current market rate of properties of this type.

Today I'm going to look into what I need to do for the RAC process and whether any ruling they make would give me some further helpful delays.

Yorkie1

I suspect that a minor typo isn't going to help your case.

What is preventing the LL just giving you a s.21 notice and a bad reference, now that you're making life difficult for him (as you are entitled to, I recognise)?

G_M

Not much I can add to the 1st post in this thread. I've not had personal experience and I suspect it's not a matter that often comes up either in the courts or in day-to-day LL/tenant interaction.

However, the ruling is there.