Section 21 - is it essential?

secondtoughest

I spoke to the lender (YBS) again. They say they required it for the PREVIOUS tenant. Well there wasnt a previous tenant as that was me. So the letting agent didnt tick the box as they didn't need to provide notice to anyone. (How I wish one of the two parties had called me at this point). But even though I explained the situation, now YBS are saying the current tenancy is invalid so they require me to end the current one and start a new one with the correct box ticked. So I'll take the advice above and do a 5 month tenancy!

Thanks for all your help!

franklee

secondtoughest wrote: »

I spoke to the lender (YBS) again. They say they required it for the PREVIOUS tenant. Well there wasnt a previous tenant as that was me. So the letting agent didnt tick the box as they didn't need to provide notice to anyone. (How I wish one of the two parties had called me at this point). But even though I explained the situation, now YBS are saying the current tenancy is invalid so they require me to end the current one and start a new one with the correct box ticked. So I'll take the advice above and do a 5 month tenancy!

Some relief the lender isn't proposing a Sword of Damocles approach to the section 21. However this new reason sounds odd. If you've installed a tenant then there's a tenancy, regardless of if it's not written down, if it's on loo roll or whatever. So the tenancy is valid. No need for the tenant to sign a new agreement. I wonder if you are getting the wrong end of the stick not helped by the lender's staff being untrained and yourself being unfamiliar with what you are doing? I'm sure if YBS had some completely bonkers terms it would have come up before.

Kynthia

secondtoughest wrote: »

But even though I explained the situation, now YBS are saying the current tenancy is invalid so they require me to end the current one and start a new one with the correct box ticked. So I'll take the advice above and do a 5 month tenancy!

Thanks for all your help!

What makes them think the current tenancy is invalid? Just because it doesn't tick one of their boxes doesn't nullify a valid legal tenancy. Also how are you going to end the current tenancy? As unless the tenant agrees, you would have to go to court to do this and can't even start the process before the end of the fixed term unless the owe 2 months rent. What a pickle the mortgage company is making of this.

ValHaller

theartfullodger wrote: »

The Mortgage company (if this genuinely is their request & not some garbled message from a k**b-head broker...) don't appear to understand the law as others have said - but so what!

Just do as they ask, explain to tenant it will be invalid, no problems all round...

Next?

Exactly my take on it. Do as the mortgage lender asks before protecting the deposit and before signing the tenancy.

What the lender does not know cannot hurt them - they have been in the game for years, after all.

G_M

thesaint wrote: »

As stated earlier, what I would do is to issue a valid Sec 21, then render it null and void by giving the tenant a new fixed term.

Scenario:

Tenancy starts 1st July 2013 - 6 month fixed term.
Sec 21 issued July 23rd to expire after 31st Jan 2014
Tenants come in on 1st Aug 2013 - 5 month fixed term.

Job done.

I would not do this.

The mortgage lender has stated that for their Consent To Let to be valid, they "require a Section 21 to be included with the tenancy."

To create a second, 5 month tenancy without the associated S21 would be to contravene their clear condition, and invalidate the CTL.

In contrast, to issue a S21 as per their condition 'with the (original 6 month) tenancy' wouldcomply with their condition, validating the CTL.

The S21 however, as previously pointed out, would be invalid.

I would send the mortgage lender a copy of the original tenancy with S21 attached. They will file it and be happy.

I would then advise the tenant of the rules surrounding S21 Notices, to give them confidence you do not intend to evict.

Werdnal

I would get the agents to issue the Section 21 on the day the tenancy is signed, and before the deposit is protected. Send this to the mortgage company, safe in the knowledge that it is invalid anyway, as any notice issued prior to deposit being secured and PI served to tenant is bin-fodder!

thesaint

G_M wrote: »

I would not do this.

The mortgage lender has stated that for their Consent To Let to be valid, they "require a Section 21 to be included with the tenancy."

No, the OP has stated what the lender requires.

now YBS are saying the current tenancy is invalid so they require me to end the current one and start a new one with the correct box ticked.