I think my Section 21 is illegal.

ruggedtoast

franklee

GDB2222 wrote: »

And the landlord is supposed to be a decent chap, pay up and give a good reference?

What I'm suggesting is the LL write an honest reference untainted by the tenant challenging the invalid S21 (as they have every right to do).

Your eailier post that a good reference be taken away if the tenant challenges the S21 implies the tenant was a good tenant. Or are you suggesting the LL make the good bit up as well by painting a bad tenant as good when it suits them? Your attitude to this is detrimental to both the tenant and the next landlord. This attitude:

GDB2222 wrote: »

Either you move out more or less in line with the (invalid) S21, or you don't get a good reference.

GDB2222 wrote: »

And the tenant told the agent she was thinking about getting a puppy, but did not get agreement from the landlord.

The agent saying the puppy is fine is the landlord agreeing as far as the tenant is concerned. The agent as the agent of the landlord speaks for the landlord. If the agent overstepped the mark the LL needs to take issue with the agent not the tenant. It is not the tenant's job to contact the LL direct where an agent is managing the property. Many tenants do not have the LL's details especially during the application stage. Perhaps you missed this:

Robsia wrote: »

When I first inquired about the house, there were several questions I had to answer, one of which was about pets. I told the letting agents that we had a cat and we were planning on getting a puppy.

They passed my answers on to the LL and a few days later I got a reply back saying that that was fine and I could proceed with my application.

Robsia

mrginge wrote: »

The point that you are failing to grasp is that the one third of the story you have read on here may be completely different to the version of events that the LL and LA were to give.

Those of us with some level of intelligence and perspective can see that things may not be as cut and dried, and as such can provide an objective opinion without simply resorting to LL bashing.

It may well be the case that the LL is an utter div who has done nothing to fulfil their obligations, however it may also be the case that OP has antagonised and disrupted the LL and LA to the point that they cant wait to get shut of them.

Either way, in almost all cases it is far better to come to a reasonable negotiated exit that benefits all parties than simply take the childish approach of confrontation for the sake of it, as this will inevitably lead to further problems for the OP.

Hopefully the OP has some form of common sense and can see this.

Well, as far as I am concerned, any antagonising and/or disruption on my part has only happened AFTER the invalid S21 was issued.

Before then, I thought everything was fine, aside from him nagging me, via the LA, to mow the lawn and weed the garden, which was a little annoying. If there was a problem, aside from the matter of the dog - which I am innocent in - I was not aware of it. I am within my rights to ask the landlord to fix a non-opening window and two broken spindles, which I had made him aware of within three weeks of us moving in, and my only response to him not doing it was slightly puzzled wondering why I had not yet heard anything.

They came for an inspection on June 26th during which his attitude was thoroughly and unprovokedly nasty and made me cry. The house was immaculate. I even mowed the lawn. The agent assured me he had not come to serve me notice yet two days later - notice was served.

Now, my heels are in and I am sticking rigidly to my rights, which is my right!

ruggedtoast

GDB2222 wrote: »

There's legislation to protect tenants from harassment and from eviction without the correct notices etc. I am all in favour of that.

Then there are tenants who play this for all they are worth. Robsia says that she isn't really looking for somewhere else to move in the hope of extracting a payment from the LL. It's not a particularly moral stance, is it?

And the landlord is supposed to be a decent chap, pay up and give a good reference?

And the tenant told the agent she was thinking about getting a puppy, but did not get agreement from the landlord.

The agent is the person the landlord has elected to represent himself to the tenant. That is the point of an agent.

If the landlord has legally appointed an incompetent representative who forgets to tell him about dogs and can't serve a Section 21 correctly then that is his learning curve.