Abandonement, surrender? now I'm confused

RAS

We are all assuming you live in England and Wales? Scottish law is different.

The old tenant remains liable for the rent until the end of the fixed term. Unless they agree to surrender early when a new tenant moves in.

Have you told the EA that you require the old tenant to pay the booking fee?

Have you also told the old tenant that they remain liable for the bills until the new tenant moves in?

And have you sorted out what happens regarding the Council Tax?

Remember the EA is your employee and they do what you tell them, not the other way round.

Pixie5740

Going by the OP's original thread...

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4884123=

...the tenant has been paying rent late and has now stopped paying it altogether.

When the LA says that they won't get a surrender until a new tenant agrees do they mean they won't ask the current tenant to surrender until a new tenant signs a tenancy agreement? If so that sounds messy if the current tenant goes on to decide not to sign a surrender for whatever reason.

Guest101

Op take control. Instruct your LA or do it yourself. To surrender the property in exchange for payment of 180 pounds releting fee.

Your agent isn't making sense and your tenant knows his stuff. ( probably better than your agent )

AFK_Matrix

I honestly wouldn't go by anything an LA tells you as they have no formal qualifications and most do not seem to know what they are doing. As Guest101 says put your foot down, take the advice from experienced people here and INSIST the agent does what YOU want not what he thinks would be ok as he is probably trying to do the least amount of work etc.

You have been given some sound advice on what to do so TELL your agent to DO IT!

poppysarah

allthingsmustpass wrote: »

I don't really see much of a problem here,

Insurance.
The property being empty, potentially unheated.

tumbledowngirl

allthingsmustpass wrote: »

I don't really see much of a problem here, the tenant is still paying rent and they are right that its no-ones business but their own if they pay for another rental at the same time.

They wanted to move out so request termination of AST, didn't get it, moved on anyway and now are paying for both properties.

You have a let property with rent coming in and no wear and tear or damage because the property isn't being lived in. Much. Who knows maybe they will choose to flit between one and the other since they're close and they're paying for it still.

Are you all in a tizzy over nothing?

Sounds to me like their prompt response to the agent regarding the viewing is due to their view that if you get someone else in before the end of their tenancy thats cheaper for them than paying for the remainder of their term.

And regarding :
"why try to assert your rights under a tenancy agreement you claim to want to surrender?"
Why not? It hasnt been surrendered so the rights remain. Make your mind up!




If I am understanding this correctly it sounds like you've shot yourself in the foot after getting into a panic after finding they had a new property. What better for a landlord than rent coming in but no tenant in the property? doh! :rotfl:

If a tenant moves out of a property but doesn't sign a surrender, then he can, as I understand it, claim unfair eviction when a new tenant is moved in - THAT'S why I want the tenant to make his kind up whether he is actually keeping both properties on, or wants to surrender ours. We have been told by the agent we need to be seen to be "fair and reasonable" by finding new tenants asap...yet the tenant hasn't actually formally said they wish to surrender their tenancy.

Believe me, I'm more than happy to let the tenancy run without the tenant occupying the property - who wouldn't be?? - BUT I don't believe the tenant has any intention of paying rent on 2 properties for the next 6 months and I don't want to be out of pocket to the cost of over £3000 when we take him to court for unpaid rent and he claims we haven't mitigated our losses by getting new tenants in.

tumbledowngirl

RAS wrote: »

We are all assuming you live in England and Wales? Scottish law is different.

The old tenant remains liable for the rent until the end of the fixed term. Unless they agree to surrender early when a new tenant moves in.

Have you told the EA that you require the old tenant to pay the booking fee?

Have you also told the old tenant that they remain liable for the bills until the new tenant moves in?

And have you sorted out what happens regarding the Council Tax?

Remember the EA is your employee and they do what you tell them, not the other way round.

The property is in Wales.
The tenant has been told that he remains liable for the rent and also the re-letting fee until a new tenant moves in.
He has agreed to a viewing of the house today BUT not actually signed anything to say he wishes/agrees to surrender his tenancy.
The agent is arguing that now that the tenant has moved out, we have to be seen to be "fair and reasonable" in helping mitigate his losses but without a surrender, how can anyone prove that the tenant didn't intend to keep the property on for the rest of the agreement?

Maybe I'm being too "by the book" here - but shouldn't we be either carrying on with the current agreement (and not remarketing the property) or getting a signed surrender and actively looking for new tenants? Surely it's one or the other, and not both??
I understand the tenant has to pay the rent whatever, but the implications are different in each scenario, aren't they?

tumbledowngirl

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Going by the OP's original thread...

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4884123=

...the tenant has been paying rent late and has now stopped paying it altogether.

When the LA says that they won't get a surrender until a new tenant agrees do they mean they won't ask the current tenant to surrender until a new tenant signs a tenancy agreement? If so that sounds messy if the current tenant goes on to decide not to sign a surrender for whatever reason.

Exactly my point!!
If the current tenant wants out, he won't have any issue with signing a surrender.
If he refuses to sign a surrender, surely the AST stands, along with all responsibilities that go with it.

theEnd

I would have thought by this stage you'd just be pleased to see the back of them.

Do you ever expect to get any further money from them?

tumbledowngirl

theEnd wrote: »

I would have thought by this stage you'd just be pleased to see the back of them.

Do you ever expect to get any further money from them?

I'm only happy to see the back of them if I'm not left massively out of pocket, or with them claiming they've not been treated fairly and reasonably in a court case.

They wanted to rent the house, they asked for a 12 month tenancy agreement, they've now decided they may or may not want to keep the property - they have some remaining financial obligations to me, and I have some legal obligations to them. It's not quite as simple as, "they're not living in the property any more so wave them good bye and get new tenants in."

They have now paid this month's rent, so are still my tenants - and technically still my tenants until July, unless a surrender is agreed. Nothing to do with what I'd like,but everything to do with what the law says.