Wrong contract given makes it void?

techcastoni

I am currently renting where the landlord and his family are also occupants of the property. According to shelter.org I am classed as an excluded occupier because the landlord and his family live in the same house and use the same shared facilities. However my contract opens with the following:

This Agreement is made pursuant to Part 1 of the Housing Act 1988 (as amended) with the intention of creating an Assured Shorthold Tenancy Agreement.

Surely the discrepancy makes the contract void as I don't believe I can be in an Assured Shorthold Tenancy Agreement?

Hump

Your contract is valid i.e. living in the landlord's property and paying him/ her the agreed charge for use and occupation. The paperwork however is wrong.

What's the reason for asking? is there an issue or problem somewhere behind the scenes?

techcastoni

Hump wrote: »

Your contract is valid i.e. living in the landlord's property and paying him/ her the agreed charge for use and occupation. The paperwork however is wrong.

What's the reason for asking? is there an issue or problem somewhere behind the scenes?

I want to leave the property but the landlord refuses to end the contract. But seeing as the paperwork is wrong then surely the paperwork is void and I am free to leave without him being able to pursue me?

Annisele

If the paperwork is wrong, that doesn't (generally) make the entire agreement void.

You've been living in the place, and you've been paying the agreed rent. So, on the face of it there's a valid agreement in place. However, there may be a dispute about the terms of that agreement.

The landlord clearly can't force you to live in the property (because that would be false imprisonment/kidnap/all sorts of bad things). Whether he can force you to pay rent depends on the terms of your agreement with him. Ultimately, if you don't pay up and he wants you to, it would be for a court to decide what those terms were.

How much notice does the landlord say you have to give, and how much do you want to give? Does the written agreement say anything about notice periods?

techcastoni

Annisele wrote: »

If the paperwork is wrong, that doesn't (generally) make the entire agreement void.

You've been living in the place, and you've been paying the agreed rent. So, on the face of it there's a valid agreement in place. However, there may be a dispute about the terms of that agreement.

The landlord clearly can't force you to live in the property (because that would be false imprisonment/kidnap/all sorts of bad things). Whether he can force you to pay rent depends on the terms of your agreement with him. Ultimately, if you don't pay up and he wants you to, it would be for a court to decide what those terms were.

How much notice does the landlord say you have to give, and how much do you want to give? Does the written agreement say anything about notice periods?

So I don't understand why if the paperwork is wrong then the contract terms are still valid. The contract is for a fixed term period and I want to move out before the end of this fixed term because I don't believe the landlord can be trusted or has any integrity.

Their are no break clauses in the contract which is why I am seeking ways to void it on the basis it's not even the correct type of contract.

I also don't believe it can be an assured short holder tenancy agreement because if it was then the landlord would have to put my deposit in a deposit protection scheme which I know he hasn't done as I have checked. So it's one or the other - either the contract is valid and he puts my deposit in a protection scheme or I can take him to court over it, or the contract is wrong and I am free to leave without him being able to pursue me.

I have done further research and this guy is subletting - and whilst I believe he has permission from the owner to sublet, I don't think the house owner has permission from the mortgage lender to let the house.

So with all that considered, I believe I have a strong case to get out of this contract but I want to seek others views before I take action.

dancingfairy

Sounds like you are a lodger to me than a tenant (and therefore have a lot less rights). My take on it is that you are a lodger and therefore probably! only have to give reasonable notice (perhaps a month max?) but this is my guess - hopefully someone more knowledgeable will be along to clarify.
Have you actually spoken to Shelter? they are the experts.
You either need to find out from Shelter or decide to just give your notice and accept that if he objects then he can take it to court and a court can decide.
df

dancingfairy

Have just found your other thread. I'm not sure why you need 2 threads on this topic. You appear to have been given all the advice you need on the other thread ie give your notice and leave. Whether they have permission to let or not is irrelevant as you are a lodger as far as I can tell.
df

N79

techcastoni wrote: »

I am currently renting where the landlord and his family are also occupants of the property. According to shelter.org I am classed as an excluded occupier because the landlord and his family live in the same house and use the same shared facilities. However my contract opens with the following:

This Agreement is made pursuant to Part 1 of the Housing Act 1988 (as amended) with the intention of creating an Assured Shorthold Tenancy Agreement.

Surely the discrepancy makes the contract void as I don't believe I can be in an Assured Shorthold Tenancy Agreement?

There is no where near enough detail to answer your question.

What exactly is the property let to you on the agreement. How does this relate to the totality of the address at which you reside?

Who exactly is your LL and who exactly lives at the address and what access / restrictions on access do you and the other inhabitants have?

When did the agreement start and what is the term? How often do you pay rent?

princeofpounds

So I don't understand why if the paperwork is wrong then the contract terms are still valid.

Because courts use some common sense, and they evaluate what the intention to contract was.

Both of you clearly intended to create some kind of lodging agreement or tenancy agreement. You both agreed on many contractual parameters. You both wanted it to be an AST.

The only problem is it can't be an AST, as it does not meet the legal tick-boxes required. But that is merely one of the many things you agreed on.

An unenforceable clause in a contract does not invalidate the whole contract. Contracts are routinely full of unenforceable clauses.

For instance, let's imagine I am a gangmaster, and I promise to pay you £100 for a day of cockle-picking in Morecambe bay. At the end of the day, I tell you that 'sorry, I can't pay you because I don't have a gangmaster's license so legally I wasn't supposed to employ you and our contract is invalid'. You are going to be pretty hacked off, and rightfully so.

Far more important for you is to consider your status as a lodger rather than a tenant (it's clear from the other thread this is what you are).

techcastoni

dancingfairy wrote: »

Sounds like you are a lodger to me than a tenant (and therefore have a lot less rights). My take on it is that you are a lodger and therefore probably! only have to give reasonable notice (perhaps a month max?) but this is my guess - hopefully someone more knowledgeable will be along to clarify.
Have you actually spoken to Shelter? they are the experts.
You either need to find out from Shelter or decide to just give your notice and accept that if he objects then he can take it to court and a court can decide.
df

I have spoken to Shelter a couple of times now and they told me the contract is valid so I am tied in for the extent of the contract and cannot terminate the contract without the landlord agreeing to do so.

When I enquired with the bank after reading another thread on this forum about mortgage holders illegally renting out properties without the mortgage lenders consent I decided to make my own enquiries. It appears the mortgage holder has got permission to rent it out (consent to let) but the mortgage lender is concerned that their is further subletting going on which is illegal.

techcastoni

dancingfairy wrote: »

Have just found your other thread. I'm not sure why you need 2 threads on this topic. You appear to have been given all the advice you need on the other thread ie give your notice and leave. Whether they have permission to let or not is irrelevant as you are a lodger as far as I can tell.
df

One thread is about the titling of the contract as I wanted some views on that specifically, the other thread is seeking advice on ending my contract.