Dispute over tenancy termination

HeadouttheSand_2

Thanks GM

So for clarification the only things that apply as far your concerned are the 6 clauses that where provided when we signed the last agreement last year which includes the relevant information above.

Guest101

HeadouttheSand wrote: »

Thanks GM

So for clarification the only things that apply as far your concerned are the 6 clauses that where provided when we signed the last agreement last year which includes the relevant information above.

My original reply was short, I apologise. U are bound by tenancy laws. The tenancy can be a napkin saying 'I will pay u 300 pounds a month for twelve months'. Ur stuck, sorry

HeadouttheSand_2

Not that i am going to this, but the fact the contract we signed states "the tenancy shall include all fixtures and fittings in the premises including all matters and schedule of conditions" - which was never done by the LL means we could challenge most claims to withhold our deposit because there is no proof that the fixtures or fittings existed?

given that we are possibly liable for the rent for a further two months we would like to protect as much of our deposit as possible.

G_M

HeadouttheSand wrote: »

Not that i am going to this, but the fact the contract we signed states "the tenancy shall include all fixtures and fittings in the premises including all matters and schedule of conditions" - which was never done by the LL means we could challenge most claims to withhold our deposit because there is no proof that the fixtures or fittings existed?

given that we are possibly liable for the rent for a further two months we would like to protect as much of our deposit as possible.

So now that you have realised you have legally commited yourself to pay rent till April, but regret your decision, you are contemplating ways to commit fraud and rip off the landlord....?

lighting_up_the_chalice

HeadouttheSand wrote: »

Yes it is with the deposit guarantee scheme

Was the proscribed information provided again when you last renewed the tenancy?

This won't change your position regarding when the tenancy ends, but there may be some negotiating advantages if the information wasn't provided when tenancy last renewed.

HeadouttheSand_2

No at all,

I am just questioning the rights of our circumstances, If the landlord was to claim that, for example, the carpets in the house are not in the condition that it was provided, excluding normal wear and tear) and we argue differently - he has no right of proving otherwise as there was no inventory

HeadouttheSand_2

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Was the proscribed information provided again when you last renewed the tenancy?

This won't change your position regarding when the tenancy ends, but there may be some negotiating advantages if the information wasn't provided when tenancy last renewed.

No it wasnt provided again when the tenancy was renewed. All that was provided was the first 6 clauses.

lighting_up_the_chalice

G_M wrote: »

So now that you have realised you have legally commited yourself to pay rent till April, but regret your decision, you are contemplating ways to commit fraud and rip off the landlord....?

Fraud? Rip off the LL? How? This is no different to the many questions on here about the safety of a deposit without an agreed inventory. I don't recall you describing any of those as "fraudulent". In fact, I do recall you giving such foolish landlords rather short shrift.

lighting_up_the_chalice

HeadouttheSand wrote: »

No it wasnt provided again when the tenancy was renewed. All that was provided was the first 6 clauses.

Well, it's a thin one at the moment, but a recent case (Superstrike vs. Rodrigues) held that the end of a fixed term tenancy is the end of a tenancy and that, in this case, any periodic tenancy arising after that date was, in fact, a new tenancy, with effectively a new deposit, requiring the re-service of the proscribed information.

It has to be said that Superstrike related to a very specific set of circumstances which do not exactly match yours.

However, the full implications of Superstrike have yet to be tested in court and, as a result, it is a rather foggy legal area. Most deposit protection providers are suggesting that the proscribed information be re-served at any renewal or when a FT tenancy rolls into a periodic.

Might be worth threatening him with the "up to 3X" penalty and see what happens. Got to be worth a try... nothing to lose and all that.

HeadouttheSand_2

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Might be worth threatening him with the "up to 3X" penalty and see what happens. Got to be worth a try... nothing to lose and all that.

Excuse my ignorance but what does this mean up to 3x penalty?