Urgent!!! - ta notice clause

Kazzaroo

Recieved copy of new tenancy agreement today from LA and it has this clause in it :

"THIS NOTICE is to inform you that the landlord may recover possession of the property under ground 1 of part 1 of schedule 2 of the housing act 1988, that the owners having occupied the dwelling as their principle dwelling may wish to recover possession at the end of the tenancy to re-occupy the property themselves (but not at any time earlier than six months from the beginning of the tenancy in the case of an Assured Shorthold Tenancy) and further that the property is subject to a mortgage and the mortgagee may require possession of the property under the terms of that mortgage and possession of the property may be recovered under ground 2 of part 1 of schedule 2 of the housing act 1988 (but not at any time earlier than six months from the beginning of the tenancy in the case of an Assured Shorthold Tenancy).

3. This notice was served on you on: "

My understanding of this is that after the 6 months are up the LL/LA could go to court and get a court order for eviction on the spot, is this right ?,i have paid a £300 deposit before recieving the TA,what happens to that if i dont sign the TA/Notice ? am i entitled to the deposit back ?

would appreciate quick replies if possible

Thanks in advance

Kazzaroo

Is this a standard clause/notice within TA's now?,LA claims it is standard in all AST's

I have been with current LL (private rent) 2 and half years and that tenancy did not contain this clause/notice (or anything similar)

would this notice over-rule statutory rights ? ie must be given 2 months notice after expiry of AST ?

embob74

Nothing over-rules statutory rights but you may be given additional rights (or the LL may) within an agreement. More knowledgeable bods will be along soon I'm sure but from what I gather from the clause it simply states what was already in place.
You can not get evicted on the spot. You would still have to be given 2 months notice.

embob74

As an aside - why have you got a new tenancy agreement? Have you asked for one or been told you have to have one? Was there a charge?

Kazzaroo

embob74 wrote: »

Nothing over-rules statutory rights but you may be given additional rights (or the LL may) within an agreement. More knowledgeable bods will be along soon I'm sure but from what I gather from the clause it simply states what was already in place.
You can not get evicted on the spot. You would still have to be given 2 months notice.

thanks embob

I'll wait to see if more knowledgeable can shed anymore light on the situation,I have rang the LA (i shall call them PL)to explain my concerns and the signing of TA has been postponed until we can agree,

my main questions are :

where would i stand in 6 months after the AST runs out?

If i was to walk away would i be entitled to get my deposit back on the basis that the tenancy it was to be used for wasn't accepted by both parties ?

looking through the TA it says that the LL is a business (another LA,),would that mean that the "owners" (which i see as the other LA as they are the written LL on the TA) cannot have "occupied" the property as the my LA (PL) told me the previous T was a single man,a staff member at PL has said (verbally over the phone) that the LL has over 100 properties so proberly wouldn't take possession after the 6 months.

Kazzaroo

embob74 wrote: »

As an aside - why have you got a new tenancy agreement? Have you asked for one or been told you have to have one? Was there a charge?

sorry thats my mistake i should have said that this will be a new tenancy with a new LL and LA that was suppose to being signed this afternoon (its not anymore)

tim123456789

This clause is one which stops a tenant gaining a lifetime tenancy under the old rules.

I doubt that it has the slightest effect to an AST with an easily identifiable termination process.

antrobus

Kazzaroo wrote: »

...My understanding of this is that after the 6 months are up the LL/LA could go to court and get a court order for eviction on the spot, is this right ?....

Basically s21 Housing Act 1988 allows the landlord to recover possession for any reason at all but requires that two months’ notice be given, but schedule 2 of the same act specifies the circumstances in which a landlord can recover possession without any notice, so long as they have pre-notified the tenant before the tenancy began that this might happen.

So the landlord can apply to the County Court for a possession order immediately, rather than being obliged to wait two months to see if you're going to comply with the notice.

Kazzaroo wrote: »

....looking through the TA it says that the LL is a business ...

Obviously if the landlord is seeking to "recover possession of the property under ground 1 of part 1 of schedule 2 of the housing act 1988" on the basis that the owners once "occupied the dwelling as their principle dwelling" and they intend to "re-occupy the property themselves" then these things have to be true.

Making an application to the County Court for a possession on the basis of claims that are not true would be perjury.

Kazzaroo

antrobus wrote: »

Basically s21 Housing Act 1988 allows the landlord to recover possession for any reason at all but requires that two months’ notice be given, but schedule 2 of the same act specifies the circumstances in which a landlord can recover possession without any notice, so long as they have pre-notified the tenant before the tenancy began that this might happen.

So the landlord can apply to the County Court for a possession order immediately, rather than being obliged to wait two months to see if you're going to comply with the notice.



Obviously if the landlord is seeking to "recover possession of the property under ground 1 of part 1 of schedule 2 of the housing act 1988" on the basis that the owners once "occupied the dwelling as their principle dwelling" and they intend to "re-occupy the property themselves" then these things have to be true.

Making an application to the County Court for a possession on the basis of claims that are not true would be perjury.

so essentially its pointless having it there in the first place (from my point of view) because they wouldn't be able to enforce it because ground 1 cannot be used because they are a business and didnt/havent lived there before my tenancy began and ground 2 doesnt apply because its to do with mortgages ?,If they did try (assuming my two points above are valid) to enforce it would i get notification of court proceedings so that i could attend ?

G_M

Correct.

Ground 1 can be used by an owner-occupier who letsout theproperty (say for a year) and then decidestomove back in themselves.

If the LL is a business, clearly it cannot apply.

http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/grounds_for_possession.htm

Kazzaroo

G_M wrote: »

Correct.

Ground 1 can be used by an owner-occupier who letsout theproperty (say for a year) and then decidestomove back in themselves.

If the LL is a business, clearly it cannot apply.

http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/grounds_for_possession.htm

thanks G_M :j , am i also entitled to know the court date if they were to try and pursue eviction ?