Advice on rental payment up front – LA asking for too much?

martinsurrey

ValHaller wrote: »

That would mean that the advance rent had to be kept topped up which would effectively turn it into a deposit. And there is a limit to how much deposit can be taken, much less than 6 months iirc

High court says otherwise

http://landlordmoneysaving.com/tenancy-deposit-schemes/judges-rule-advance-rent-is-not-a-deposit/

as long as it is clear that the rent being paid covers a future period, it is NOT a deposit.

"

The Court of Appeal found that the clause requiring six months’ rent in advance was effective, and that no part of the £6,000 paid was security for the performance of the obligation, but payment of the obligation itself.


"

I Agree that there are complexities due to the poor wording of the agreement, but does the OP really want to end up at the high court?

I don’t think the EA is being reasonable, BUT, I also don’t think they'll run off with the OP's money if they pay 3 months but move out after 2, so by digging their heals in they might just cause more stress, which could be easily avoided.

suestew

Thanks all. We don't actually have a clause in our agreement about the 6 months in advance, it's purely on a normal tenancy where the rental is paid monthly.

Can anyone draft a polite email for me along the lines of we only want to pay 2 months rent and to draw their attention to the agreement itself? Also note they can't reference us as we are not working blah blah. That might work and we can see what they come back with.

Also, can we not ask them if we can speak to the Landlord direct and ask for contact details? I

ValHaller

martinsurrey wrote: »

High court says otherwise

http://landlordmoneysaving.com/tenancy-deposit-schemes/judges-rule-advance-rent-is-not-a-deposit/

as long as it is clear that the rent being paid covers a future period, it is NOT a deposit.

"

The Court of Appeal found that the clause requiring six months’ rent in advance was effective, and that no part of the £6,000 paid was security for the performance of the obligation, but payment of the obligation itself.


"

I Agree that there are complexities due to the poor wording of the agreement, but does the OP really want to end up at the high court?

I don’t think the EA is being reasonable, BUT, I also don’t think they'll run off with the OP's money if they pay 3 months but move out after 2, so by digging their heals in they might just cause more stress, which could be easily avoided.

6 months rent in advance paid at 6 months periods is as you say payment of the obligation itself. I was specifically referring to your hypothetical scenario based on rent becoming due on the 17th, keeping the advance rent always topped up to 6 months. The seems to me to be the other side of the boundary between the obligation itself and security against failing to meet the obligation.

suestew

ValHaller wrote: »

6 months rent in advance paid at 6 months periods is as you say payment of the obligation itself. I was specifically referring to your hypothetical scenario based on rent becoming due on the 17th, keeping the advance rent always topped up to 6 months. The seems to me to be the other side of the boundary between the obligation itself and security against failing to meet the obligation.

If we had to keep it topped up, surely that should be noted in our agreement? I think the agency have handled this wrong tbh.

I thought our goodwill gesture payment of a further 2 months was more than adequate, it's not that we can't afford it I just hate to be ripped off by LA's.

martinsurrey

ValHaller wrote: »

6 months rent in advance paid at 6 months periods is as you say payment of the obligation itself. I was specifically referring to your hypothetical scenario based on rent becoming due on the 17th, keeping the advance rent always topped up to 6 months. The seems to me to be the other side of the boundary between the obligation itself and security against failing to meet the obligation.

We could discuss this at length, and so could lawyers, expensive lawyers.

Main point, as it always has been is

Be careful, as kicking up a fuss now could be painful in the long term, even if you are right and win, is it worth the stress?

suestew

I wouldn't go to court about it if they really dug their heels in and I personally really do not think the Landlord would even consider serving us notice. I just would like to send agent an email and see what their response is. I don't want it to go on and on, I just though we were actually within out rights to refuse

suestew

theartfullodger wrote: »

That is really the complete break clause?? From the actual signed tenancy agreement rather than any email or other document?? And there is nothing about the landlord's right to give notice similarly???

If that really is the complete clause I'd agree the agent is talking garbage: Ignore them, serve notice (probably in person with a witness..) whenever the dates are right for you..

Yes that really is, I know it's a bit of a joke right?

To be clear, we do not know when we will serve notice, I just am not happy to pay them another 3 months and end up that they owe us a month if we move out on month 8, why should they have our money in the bank? I am trying to devise an email now that is professional and let them know they can't pull a fast one can you help with that?

Guest101

martinsurrey wrote: »

and they say "okay it was due on the 17th of every month since you moved in (Jan), so you owe 4 months’ rent (with the 5 month being just 17th June)” they issue a s8 notice as the OP is in effect 4 months behind, OP now has to pay 5 months instead of the 3 the EA wants.

All I'm saying is be careful with your next move...

Uhm what? How does that make any sense at all?? well unless ive missed something, the tenant has paid upfront

suestew

theartfullodger wrote: »

Hmmnnn: Don't think I'd bother to email them. What does the tenancy say about when/how rent is payable?? e.g. the last one I signed said... & I would be surprised if yours doesn't say rent is payable monthly ..

If that is the case simply pay the agent/landlord whatever the rent is monthly, either direct to their bank account or by cheque: Any argument the agent/landlord will lose.

You have a valid tenancy agreement: The terms are agreed: No new ones may be imposed -unless you chose to agree to them.

Best regards

Thanks. You are correct it does state monthly. I think their argument is if we pay monthly they have to reference us and I expect they will want to charge us for that. they will have a hard time doing that because we are not working, our situation has not changed we were not working at the beginning of tenancy, hence why we paid 6 months up front. we also paid an agency fee where I expect the cost of referencing is included in that so in reality they really should not be asking for more money...

Guest101

suestew wrote: »

Thanks. You are correct it does state monthly. I think their argument is if we pay monthly they have to reference us and I expect they will want to charge us for that. they will have a hard time doing that because we are not working, our situation has not changed we were not working at the beginning of tenancy, hence why we paid 6 months up front. we also paid an agency fee where I expect the cost of referencing is included in that so in reality they really should not be asking for more money...

well let them at their cost, u have a valid agreement, they cant change that