Where do I Stand as a Tenant?

scrummy_mummy_2

Guy_Montag wrote: »

I'm with Silvercar, Lynz & Daisyroots - regardless of what you & your LA agreed verbally, since no-one seems to know what they're doing I think your contract can be considered to have gone periodic. That means two months for a rent rise & two months notice.

That's the "fighting" position I would take with the LA; then I'd start negotiating.

Good luck.

I can see exactly where you are coming from and agree that you might want to consider arguing that the Fixed term has automatically lapsed into a periodic, where the main Terms of the original fixed Term AST would apply...however, if it goes to court (although you can argue that a verbal contract is a contract) I think it is going to be a hard one to prove....as you would be arguing and trying to prove intent....the paperwork would say tenant who won't leave!!
Playing Devil's advocate...what if the LL knew nothing about the initial 'negotiations' between the Agent and the Tenants? The Agent has possibly miscalculated the likely tenant response and now the tenant is in a position where he has been 'negotitated' into leaving....I am sure that it is only is BOTH parties agree that a fixed term AST lapses onto a periodic....this would require LL consent.
The agent is purely a go between and perhaps has acted 'in the LL interests (!) without advising him of what they are trying to do?...he may have begun renewal negotiations too late but that doesn't mean the tenancy automatically lapses into a periodic.

sooz

If your fixed term ended in mid may, your last rent payment would have been in mid april.

have you and your flatmates made a rent payment in mid-may (at the same rate as in april)?

if so, and this payment was accepted by your landlord, you have got a periodic tenancy, and as silvercar says, if they want you to leave, they must give you two month's notice.

scrummy_mummy_2

sooz wrote: »

If your fixed term ended in mid may, your last rent payment would have been in mid april.

have you and your flatmates made a rent payment in mid-may (at the same rate as in april)?

if so, and this payment was accepted by your landlord, you have got a periodic tenancy, and as silvercar says, if they want you to leave, they must give you two month's notice.

Excellent point.....by definition, if the agent accepted a payment mid May they 'agreed' on behalf (as a result of their actions) of the LL to continue the original Tenancy on a periodic basis.....

lynzpower

scrummy_mummy wrote: »

I can see exactly where you are coming from and agree that you might want to consider arguing that the Fixed term has automatically lapsed into a periodic, where the main Terms of the original fixed Term AST would apply...however, if it goes to court (although you can argue that a verbal contract is a contract) I think it is going to be a hard one to prove....as you would be arguing and trying to prove intent....the paperwork would say tenant who won't leave!!
Playing Devil's advocate...what if the LL knew nothing about the initial 'negotiations' between the Agent and the Tenants? The Agent has possibly miscalculated the likely tenant response and now the tenant is in a position where he has been 'negotitated' into leaving....I am sure that it is only is BOTH parties agree that a fixed term AST lapses onto a periodic....this would require LL consent.
The agent is purely a go between and perhaps has acted 'in the LL interests (!) without advising him of what they are trying to do?...he may have begun renewal negotiations too late but that doesn't mean the tenancy automatically lapses into a periodic.

In the agency where I worked, the LL and LA were together, and the LL had signed numerous contracts that the LA worked for the LLs best interests. therefore whatever the LA says, is to be understood to be fact, unless the LL had expressly stated in writing otherwise- indeed what would be the point of hiring a LA to do the work if you didnt want to be directly involved.

In terms of whether the LA should be working in the LLs interest etc as per the bottom half of your response- wouldnt it be the case that if the LL wanted to put the rent up and/or change the terms of the lease ( inclusive/exclusive) they would have to give notice to do so. Surely the tenant shouldnt be blamed cos the LA and LL dont bother to speak to one another?

Swishter

Your tenancy is only over if you were served the required section 21 notice, if that was not the case then you can't be taken to court to be evicted. Do check though as a lot of agencies serve notice when you sign the contract, if this was done it will be with your original tenancy agreement. They can do this as it just means they are giving 6 or 12 months notice instead of the minimal 2.

If this was done all is not lost, if the tenancy came up and a verbal agreement was made that you could stay then your tenancy is now periodic, you do not need a written tenancy agreement to create the AST, a verbal agreement gives you the same rights, tenancy agreements protect LL's not the other way round and you can never sign away your statutory rights, its unenforceable. As you have made rent payments since your contract expired this supports your claim.

Rights mainly lie with the tenant not the LL, if he was not made aware of the agreement with his agent then thats between him and his agent and does not effect you.

You are not trying to screw the LL over, you are happy to pay your contracted rent until your tenancy has legally ended.

Also, the only person that can evict you is a court, the LL can't come in and take possession and neither can his agent, only the court. If you where served proper notice but didn't leave then they would have to go to court, the notice just means that the LL or agent can't start possession proceedings until the notice has expired. You are still required to pay for use of the property in the time till you leave.

A lot of lettings agents and LL's really don't have a clue about Housing Law, nearly every tenancy agreement I have seen is littered with illegal and unenforceable terms.

prudryden

Sounds like from you second post that a S21 was issued in the original contract, probably expiring at the end of May. If so, you may have to leave (probably 50/50) as the verbal agreement was for you to stay only until the end of the month, even though the original AST ended mid May.
This one seems to have a lot of variables and I would consult with one of the agencies, such as Shelter just to get some other advice. It is a bit strange that they allowed you to stay for two more weeks verbally. Doesn't make total sense.

franklee

What 's the confusion peeps?

To end the tenancy here the landlord/agent needs to serve a section 21 notice requiring possession. The rules differ slightly if the notice was served during the fixed term or afterwards but essentially the landlord is required to give two months notice. If this notice hasn't been served, no new contract signed and the tenant remains then it is AUTOMATICALLY a periodic tenancy. The fact that there have been some negotiations that have broken down is irrelevant, the only difference they make is to invalidate any S21 served BEFORE the negotiations.

oligopoly, you can stay on the old terms until either you are issued a section 13 notice (one month's notice required) of a rent increase OR you are issued a section 21 notice requiring possession OR you sign a new contract. If you really don't want to pay more then you should look for another house and give your landlord one months written notice when you want to leave. Notice served by either the landlord or tenant during a periodic tenancy has the end at the end of a period.

franklee

prudryden wrote: »

Sounds like from you second post that a S21 was issued in the original contract, probably expiring at the end of May. If so, you may have to leave (probably 50/50) as the verbal agreement was for you to stay only until the end of the month, even though the original AST ended mid May.

Nooooo!!!! A section 21 notice is an equivocal and without reservation notice for the tenant to leave. The landlord/agent cannot enter into negotiations with the tenant about remaining and have the section 21 notice remain valid. The notice isn't a "well I probably want you to leave if you don't agree to my new terms paying me more". As oligopoly has written evidence "we received a letter stating that we will now have to pay bills" of the negotiations any section 21 served at the start of the fixed term is now invalid and if the LL wants him to leave an new S21 must be served.

oligopoly, is there a section 21 notice anywhere in the paperwork you have been given?

EagerLearner

franklee wrote: »

The notice isn't a "well I probably want you to leave if you don't agree to my new terms paying me more".

Well, our ex-naldlady tried that one '£80 increase if you stay, and no new carpet or bathroom, or nice new fittings... or you leave and the new private tennant gets all the nice stuff. Oh and you have 48 hours to decide. Oh and you may not know this but if you leave I'll be keeping your deposit for the rennovations anyway.' :rolleyes:
Oli - it sounds as if your LL is hard-up at the mo, as seem to be quite a few peeps in the Buy To Let market. The interest hikes have hit them + First Time buyers the worst. So the LL is trying to protect themselves against further rises and also cut down on costs - ie the inclusive bills. You may have a right to stay and not agree to those terms, as you possibly re-entered into the rolling contract without either party realising it. Check your paperwork for section 21 and also call your local Citizens Avice Bureau for advice - also call Dawn Advice - free service - 0845 456 6815. Free legal advice that is better that CAB as at least you can get through...
Good luck :beer:

Gold_Shogun

Guy_Montag wrote: »

I'm with Silvercar, Lynz & Daisyroots - regardless of what you & your LA agreed verbally, since no-one seems to know what they're doing I think your contract can be considered to have gone periodic. That means two months for a rent rise & two months notice.

That's the "fighting" position I would take with the LA; then I'd start negotiating.

Good luck.

I STRONGLY agree with all the above PLUS Guy's quoted post ...

Your original Fixed Term Tenancy HAS ended WITHOUT you (apparently) being served either a Notice to Quit OR a Section 21 ...

Consequently you ARE currently on a Periodic Tenancy, and you do NOT have to even consider leaving UNTIL the legally required notices are served AND the required Notice Period has elapsed.

My advice = Do NOT sign any New Agreement with DIFFERENT Terms, as until & unless you do, the ORIGINAL Terms legally apply ... Stick to your guns, and do not let yourself get bullied.

Cheers
Bob