Clarify this for me please, do I have it right?

Naf

A friend of mine has hit a situation that comes up on here from time to time. I've given him some advice, just want to double check that what I remember learning from threads is right, and if there is moreover forgotten.
Essentially his AST is coming out of the initial 6 months, and letting agent have been on his back trying to get him to cough up to renew. He contacted them and they claim it is at the landlord's request. Bynthe sound of it he does not have direct contact details for the LL, only the agent; I have told him there must be an address on his tenancy agreement, even if only c/o the agent, and so to use that if all else fails.
Essentially I've suggested he needs to know from the LL direct, as agents have a habit of doing this behind LL's back just to line their pockets a bit. Explained that LL is unlikely to want to take the risk of him moving out, having a vacant property for a period, no rent, increased insurance, fees for tenant find & advertising, and risk that new tenant might not be reliable however thorough the checks are. Said he should stay put & keep paying rent until he can hear from the landlord, and even if this is at LL's request, threaten to leave and know that he can't be forced out without an eviction order, so should have time enough to find somewhere else.
This is in England, I know that can make some difference.
Firstly, am I right?
Second, have I missed anything?
Thanks in advance.

propertyman

I think you have muddied it a bit but I see you are trying to help.

If he stays then he risks the tenancy being terminated at 2 months notice.

Is he fine with that, forget the landlord or agents wishes for now?

If he is happy with 2 months security then he need not argue,simply say happy at that. They can't force him to sign, and if they give notice then he's happy that they do, right?

If not and he wants the security of another 6 months, then it is only right that the time to prepare one is paid for.

Otherwise where is the problem?

Naf

Essentially I told him that unless his peace from them badgering him about it is worth £240 a year (he doesn't want to pay, and is happy with month-by month) he should stay put. If they continue down the notice and then eviction route he can cheekily suggest that them paying his costs to move out would be cheaper than their costs in evicting him (and faster); but that letting him stay would be cheaper still.
But instead of saying that now, keep,it for later and just send than something along these lines, yes?:

I am very happy to allow the tenancy to continue on an ad-hoc basis as per my original tenancy agreement after the expiry of the initial minimum term. I see no benefit to me in paying for additional checks after those when I moved in: nothing has changed, and I continue to pay rent reliably and on time. If the landlord indeed wishes to have superfluous checks performed I will be pleased to provide all relevant details and cooperate fully in the matter so far that it is at his expense, being at his request.

Clearly not giving them notice of intent to vacate the property (which theynhave requested if he doesn't pay for the checks), but also making his intention to stay put clear.

Annisele

I don't think there's any benefit in "cheekily" suggesting anything - cheeky often goes down like a lead balloon in business relationships. I'd also be concerned that words like "superfluous" would put the agents' back up - they're just trying to do their job (which includes maximising their own profits).

For now I'd just say I was happy to continue the tenancy on a periodic basis and leave it at that.

G_M

This post explains the options, and pros/cons:

Ending/Renewing an AST (what happens when the Fixed Term ends?)(What is a Periodic Tenancy?)(How can a LL remove a tenant?)(How can a tenant end a tenancy?)

As for the LL's address there are two bits of leglislation:

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 (S48) says that AN address must be provided in writing (usually on the tenancy agreement) but it can be anywhere the LL wants eg his address, c/o his mum, or his agent etc. Without this rent does not need to be paid.

The Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 (S1) says that if a tenant WRITES to whoever collects the rent (agent) they MUST provide the LL's actual address with 21 days.

Naf

Annisele wrote: »

I don't think there's any benefit in "cheekily" suggesting anything - cheeky often goes down like a lead balloon in business relationships. I'd also be concerned that words like "superfluous" would put the agents' back up - they're just trying to do their job (which includes maximising their own profits).

For now I'd just say I was happy to continue the tenancy on a periodic basis and leave it at that.

By cheekily I didn't mean do it in a cheeky manner, rather that its something of a cheeky thing to do.
I'd do it rather matter of fact that for me to leave I need to have another property to move to, and that I intend to stay and continue paying rent until I could do it, which includes being able to afford it.

His flatmate is more nervous and it looks like he might pay up on behalf of the two of them. Seems the security is worth the £240 a year to him.

propertyman

I see your point that you staying saves the landlord all the expense of re-letting, and surely they should meet the cost of the agreement.

It's common sense but.....

It relies on the tenant saying fine I'll leave in 2 months then. That then costs the tenant all the expenses of finding a new home.

So in the end it only the agents costs of drawing up a new agreement.

motherofstudents

I think you've hit the nail on the head that it is whether paying £240 is worth it to them for having more security. Could they ask for a 12 month agreement if that is how they feel ?

pinkteapot

Both times I've rented has been from 'pro' landlords (people with a few properties rented out, not just their own house that they might want back soon). At the end of the fixed contract period I've simply said that I would prefer to let the contract roll onto a periodic contract. LL has always been happy with that.

Has your friend tried simply asking the agent for a periodic contract?

G_M

pinkteapot wrote: »

Has your friend tried simply asking the agent for a periodic contract?

Has your friend tried simply telling the agent they are moving to a periodic contract?

Naf

propertyman wrote: »

I see your point that you staying saves the landlord all the expense of re-letting, and surely they should meet the cost of the agreement.

It's common sense but.....

It relies on the tenant saying fine I'll leave in 2 months then...

Not exactly; given that the agent/LL can't force someone out without a court order, it saves them that extra expense and lengthy timescale. If the LL really wants them out for some reason then he should just issue two months' notice and be done; the fact he hasn't done that means he clearly wants tenants in the property. I'd be quite happy to call their bluff right up until their notice expires, then suggest that paying my costs to go would be cheaper than eviction proceedings (having spent the time looking for a new property anyway).
This situation only benefits the letting agent.

pinkteapot wrote: »

Has your friend tried simply asking the agent for a periodic contract?

G_M wrote: »

Has your friend tried simply telling the agent they are moving to a periodic contract?

Yes and yes.
Letting agent dropped fees to £60 this time, but said they'd have to cough up the full £120 in 6 months time again; and if that wasn't satisfactory they'd be pleased to accept my friend's notice. Hence my letter above making it clear that no notice was going to be give, there was no intention to vacate the property, and they will not be paying.
Ultimately, this is completely unnecessary as the tenancy continues anyway. The letting agent only want it to line their pockets; if the landlord wants it, then why shouldn't he pay for it? If, as I said before, the security of 6 months at a time is worth £240 a year, then the tenant could request it and pay for it. If I wanted to renew my AST for another 6 months and not just let it roll on, I wouldn't expect the LL to cover the costs, because its me requesting it!