End of AST

emslondon

We moved into a rented property on 28 April 2006 and were at that time given notice to quit on 28 April 2007. We were planning to buy after 6 months, so, fine. We have finally found a property and are hoping to complete in early May and move out at the end of May. There's no way we can move out at the end of April as we are getting married on 21 April and then going off on honeymoon for 2 weeks. I spoke to the letting agent last week about extending our tenancy by one month but he ummed and ahhed and said he would contact the landlord and get back to us, which he hasn't. I will call again tomorrow, but I don't know what to do if the LL says no and that we have to sign another minimum 6 month contract. My fiance (who works in property law) says that if the worst comes to the worst, we will just pay our rent and stay the extra month - it would take them longer than that to get a court order to evict us. But it would worry me to be out of the country at the date our tenancy expires in case they entered the property - surely we would be in breach of contract so they would be entitled to do that?

What should we do? Help! We don't need this stress while trying to buy a house and get married in the same week (exchange planned for the week of the wedding!)

Guy_Montag

Stick your stuff in storage & spend 4 weeks visiting friends & family

emslondon

Aargh, that would be a total nightmare, what with wedding dress, honeymoon luggage, etc etc! Plus the new house needs some work before we can move in.

But our best man has been living with us for the last month because of similar circumstances so he does owe us one!

silvercar

My fiance (who works in property law) says that if the worst comes to the worst, we will just pay our rent and stay the extra month - it would take them longer than that to get a court order to evict us.

Correct. I would write to the landlord and politely say that this is what you need to do. Tell him that you will be paying the rent but can't move out on the date the tenancy ends so would like to continue it on a periodic basis (ie the tenancy rolls on month by month). You then need to give amonth's notice ending at the end of a rent month and the landlord is obliged to give you 2 months notice similarly.

Letting agents hate you doing this as they won't be getting commission!

littlesaint

Do as the previous poster said and ask them to rovoke the section 21 (I'm assuming this is what they issued with). I was in a similar situation to you last month (you might find a post), compounded by the fact that the landlady went AWOL. It has now been resolved. While we have had to sign a new tenancy arrangement, the terms are more flexible. If they can't extend your AST, maybe they can do this.

As you rightly point out, you could overstay and risk eviction. While I would not encourage that approach, at least you will not require landlord references because you are buying a house. But try to resolve this amicably, if you can.

Good luck with everything!

RabbitMad

Hopefully the LL will be reasonable and let you stay for another month and a half - Have you exchanged yet? that'll help persuade LL you will go when you say you will.

But playing devils advocate:

Think about this from the LL's point of view. They rented out their house for 1 year. Not 1 year 1 month; 1 year. I assume they issued the notice at the start of the tenancy as they need the house back at the end of the year (prehaps they've been working away or taking a year out to go travelling)

What are they supposed to do now if you stay on?

Assuming my assumption is correct: Worse case scenario is that they start precedings to get you evicted. They have to rent somewhere themselves or stay in a hotel as they themselves are now homeless due to you actions. I would imagine in this situation they will be trying to reclaim any costs that they have incured due to your breach of contract. Is it worth the risk?

Try to get the LL to agree to letting you stay amicably but if not you should move out. After all you can't argue you haven't been able to find anywhere else. (You've had a whole year to look.) Plus its only 4 weeks you'll be temorarily homeless and 2 of those will be while your on your honeymoon.

I hope all goes well for you and that your wedding day is lovely.

thesaint

RabbitMad wrote: »

Hopefully the LL will be reasonable and let you stay for another month and a half - Have you exchanged yet? that'll help persuade LL you will go when you say you will.

But playing devils advocate:

Think about this from the LL's point of view. They rented out their house for 1 year. Not 1 year 1 month; 1 year. I assume they issued the notice at the start of the tenancy as they need the house back at the end of the year (prehaps they've been working away or taking a year out to go travelling)

What are they supposed to do now if you stay on?

Assuming my assumption is correct: Worse case scenario is that they start precedings to get you evicted. They have to rent somewhere themselves or stay in a hotel as they themselves are now homeless due to you actions. I would imagine in this situation they will be trying to reclaim any costs that they have incured due to your breach of contract. Is it worth the risk?

Try to get the LL to agree to letting you stay amicably but if not you should move out. After all you can't argue you haven't been able to find anywhere else. (You've had a whole year to look.) Plus its only 4 weeks you'll be temorarily homeless and 2 of those will be while your on your honeymoon.

I hope all goes well for you and that your wedding day is lovely.

Reading the first post, it seems like the OP would need to sign for 6 months, so the landlord does not require the property back.

franklee

The key thing here is to find out why you were given notice on the day you moved in. Often agents do this to force a renewal and generate a renewal fee. Landlords do it to deprive the tenant of notice later on. Notice is issued despite at the time of service not actually wanting the tenant to leave when the notice expires (it's nicknamed Sword of Damocles if you wish to search for more on the subject).

But the notice, a section 21 notice, has to be unequivocal and without reservation. If they have offered you a renewal since serving the S21 then the notice has been invalidated. So if you can collect written evidence of any offer of extension (written being easier to prove what happened) then you can simply decline the renewal and remain on a periodic tenancy.

The rest of what your fiancee said is correct, if the notice is valid it takes some time for you to be evicted, the landlord has to apply to court after the notice expires which takes some time. You will probably have to pay the landlord's court fee of 150 pounds.

There's little other risk to staying on as far as I know the landlord cannot make any other charges to you such as his hotel accommodation as posted above. (If you were renting again it would be different as you will be jeopardising your reference, but you are buying so won't need a reference). This may seem tough on those landlords who genuinely issue notice but I've no sympathy given the way the S21 is now routinely abused. With the Sword of Damocles approach, routinely serving notice to all tenants at the start of the tenancy, landlords and agents are actively training tenants to disregard S21 notices! A landlord can't keep "crying wolf" about wanting the tenant to leave and be taken seriously.

Let us know how you get on.

PS. Even if you are in breach of contract they are not entitled to enter the property unless you agree to it. They have to go through the eviction process through the courts first. In any case it's worth getting a friend to keep an eye on the property while you are away which is worth doing even if there was no eviction looming and keep your wedding presents somewhere safe.

littlesaint

Btw - I posted a thread a week or so ago saying that we had not been served another S21 since the renewal of our AST (some of you may remember the AWOL landlady saga). Well, I spoke too soon. Got one yesterday.

franklee

littlesaint wrote: »

Btw - I posted a thread a week or so ago saying that we had not been served another S21 since the renewal of our AST (some of you may remember the AWOL landlady saga). Well, I spoke too soon. Got one yesterday.

Arg! What a pain to have another S21 and again not knowing if it's "for real" or not. Not much consolation to you but Marveen Smith of Painsmith solicitors (an expert in property law and solicitor to some of the national organisations etc) was on money box the other week. Her advice to landlords was clear, if you have an agent that keeps issuing S21 notices at the start of the tenancy then find another agent. Her reason was that landlords want the property occupied and changing tenants loses them rent, after all a S21 is asking the tenant to leave! This was in answer to a tenant who had a S21 served almost a year ago at the start of the tenancy, hadn't realised it was meant (as opposed to the routine ones that aren't really meant), and had just been given ten days to move out...

Anyway I do remember your case but missed the update, but found it now and the original thread that you couldn't find again is:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=366877

In your extension both you and the landlord are allowed to give two months notice. How this interacts with the S21 you've just been issued I really don't know. Does the new S21 expire at the end of the extension of one year? I wonder if the landlord can still give notice for you to leave sooner? If it was a statuary periodic tenancy I'd know how it worked, you could just leave as the landlord has served notice, but yours isn't it's a new contract. Ho Hum, there really isn't any need for the new S21 anyway as the landlord can just give you two months notice under the extension, I wonder what on earth is going on with this agent? Have you tried asking them what the new S21 means given that the landlord has a two month breakclause now

littlesaint

Hi Frank,

It's left me rather confused about the landlady's intentions and the communication between LL and LA. We were issued a tenancy agreement for a further 12 months with two month breakclause and small rent increase. The section 21 is dated Friday 10th March 2008.

As I have explained before, me and one of my other flatmate don't expect to stay for a full year. My flatmate explained this situation to the landlady who said under the new terms we would not be required to stay a minimum of six months. We could either do a substitution at any time or all move out with two months notice. The landlady has the same flexibility.

I've not spoken to them about the s21. It seems really pointless as they know we are good tenants and we both have a two month breakclause.