Here we go again...new eviction notice received

giruzz

Hello,

A few months ago I posted a request for help looking for advice after having received an eviction notice from our Landlord.

Following the forum's suggestions we challenged the eviction notice and we never heard from our landlord until today.....

I just received a new notice and I am wondering if this one was completed correctly or if it is missing some key bits and we have ground to stay a bit longer.


Our timelines:

• 18/07/2008 - Start of first 12 months lease (on the first contract)
• 19/09/2011 - Signed a second 12 months lease
• 09/08/2012 - Received confirmation that the deposit was put in a DPS
• 19/10/2012 - Start of third (and last) lease
• 17/03/2014 - S21 Eviction notice

This time, the content of the eviction notice is slightly more meaty than the previous one so I was wondering if this is valid or not.

I have redacted a copy of the notice and I was wondering if you could confirm a couple of questions.



1) I know that we are talking about one/two days but the contract started on the 19th of October while the eviction mentions two months from the 17th of March. Does it mean that we have any grounds to consider the notice invalid because it should have given us two months from the 19th of March?
(I'm assuming that the saving clause on the notice makes it valid but I am just hoping that this is not the case due to the fact that it says 17/03/2014. Or at the end - i.e. there is a period rather than a comma)

2) After we signed our third contract we never received any confirmation re the DPS (but we were informed about the DPS details towards the end of the second contract). Does this mean that we still have grounds to consider this S21 invalid ?

3) The Document was sent via email,the landlord name is just the name of the company owning the property 'XXX Builders' and the wet signature is not really understandable (something like P.A.A. something.) -> is this OK?

4) My gf's name is slightly misspelled. It should be something like Smith but it is SSmith. Is this fine or does it make the notice invalid?



You are probably wondering why we want to stay here...the reason is simple...we are going to move in mid-June / early July and I really don't want to have to find a temporary accommodation for 4-6 weeks while ready to move.

Thanks,
Giruzz

rpc

giruzz wrote: »

2) After we signed our third contract we never received any confirmation re the DPS (but we were informed about the DPS details towards the end of the second contract). Does this mean that we still have grounds to consider this S21 invalid ?

Lack of prescribed information probably renders the notice void. The landlord needs to BOTH protect the deposit AND serve the prescribed information to satisfy their obligations.
https://www.depositprotection.com/help/browse/custodial/agent-landlord/prescribed-information
https://www.depositprotection.com/documents/superstrike-vs-rodrigues-guidance-on-implications.pdf

3) The Document was sent via email,the landlord name is just the name of the company owning the property 'XXX Builders' and the wet signature is not really understandable (something like P.A.A. something.) -> is this OK?

Does your contract permit serving notices by email? It usually would have to be a letter.

Is the name of the landlord the same as the one on your tenancy?

4) My gf's name is slightly misspelled. It should be something like Smith but it is SSmith. Is this fine or does it make the notice invalid?

Trivial error, unlikely to make any difference. If they called her Ms Jones, it would be significant but the meaning of SSmith is clear enough.

edit: Have you checked with DPS that they actually have the deposit?

G_M

giruzz wrote: »

Our timelines:

• 18/07/2008 - Start of first 12 months lease (on the first contract)
• 19/09/2011 - Signed a second 12 months lease
• Date deposit paid please?
• 09/08/2012 - Received confirmation that the deposit was put in a DPS - was this within 30 days of payment? Did you receive the "Prescribed Information "
  
• 19/10/2012 - Start of third (and last) lease
• Was Prescribed Information re-issued? Date?
• On/after 18/10/13 when the tenancy went Periodic, was the Prescribed Information re-issued again within 30 dats?
  
• 17/03/2014 - S21 Eviction notice

1) I know that we are talking about one/two days but the contract started on the 19th of October while the eviction mentions two months from the 17th of March. Does it mean that we have any grounds to consider the notice invalid because it should have given us two months from the 19th of March?
(I'm assuming that the saving clause on the notice makes it valid but I am just hoping that this is not the case due to the fact that it says 17/03/2014. Or at the end - i.e. there is a period rather than a comma)
The LL has stupidly used a S21 (4)(a). He could have used a S21 (1)(b) and just given 2 calender months.
With the S21 (4)(a) he must give
* at least 2 calender months AND
* end with a tenancy period.

He has eneterd the wrong date. He entered the service date where he should have entered the expiry date.

However, as you say, the saving clause will make it valid.

Assuming
a) it was served on 17/3/14 and
b) the tenancy periods run from 19th to 18th of each month,
then the notice will expire on 18th May 2014

2) After we signed our third contract we never received any confirmation re the DPS (but we were informed about the DPS details towards the end of the second contract). Does this mean that we still have grounds to consider this S21 invalid ?
I believe the S21 will still be valid, since the deposit is registered, but you can sue for 3 times the deposit for failure to issue the Prescribed Information . However this area of law is unclear so depends on the court decision.

3) The Document was sent via email,the landlord name is just the name of the company owning the property 'XXX Builders' and the wet signature is not really understandable (something like P.A.A. something.) -> is this OK?
Read your tenancy agreement. What does it say about "service of notices". Usually they must be served on the tenant at the property address (ie by hand or by mail). But I cannot see your TA!

4) My gf's name is slightly misspelled. It should be something like Smith but it is SSmith. Is this fine or does it make the notice invalid?

Irrelevant - the court will assume that all parties know/understand who is being referred to



Thanks,
Giruzz

I think...............................

Just read rpc's reply - I think he's right about the failure to re-issue the PI invalidating the S21.

giruzz

rpc wrote: »

Lack of prescribed information probably renders the notice void. The landlord needs to BOTH protect the deposit AND serve the prescribed information to satisfy their obligations.
https://www.depositprotection.com/help/browse/custodial/agent-landlord/prescribed-information
https://www.depositprotection.com/documents/superstrike-vs-rodrigues-guidance-on-implications.pdf

Does your contract permit serving notices by email? It usually would have to be a letter.

I googled a couple of sentences from my contract and discovered that it was taken from here

Clause 5.6 on page 5 says that notice should be served by first / second class. However, the contract we were provided has less clauses (i.e. these points 3.40, 3.41, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6 and 5.7 are not printed on the form we signed)

So there is no provision on how notice should be served on the document we have here. Unless section 5.4 The landlord notifies the Tenant that the Tenancy may serve notices on the Landlord at the following address (address redacted) is valid both ways.

Is the name of the landlord the same as the one on your tenancy?

Trivial error, unlikely to make any difference. If they called her Ms Jones, it would be significant but the meaning of SSmith is clear enough.

edit: Have you checked with DPS that they actually have the deposit?

As per my gf's name there is a trivial error.

The owner on the contract is XXXX 1 BUILDERS LTD
The name on the S21 notice is XXXX1 Builders

G_M and rpc, thank you once again for all your help!

giruzz

Pixie5740

Have you mentioned to the LL that you're looking to move mid-June/early-July anyway?

giruzz

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Have you mentioned to the LL that you're looking to move mid-June/early-July anyway?

Yes and didn't have any luck. We are still asked to move from the flat....

I didn't want to argue so I just said 'thank you' and hunged-up the phone.

Pixie5740

Even if the S21 ends up being valid you could drag this out to June or July. I know it's a bit shady but it is doable.

rpc

giruzz wrote: »

So there is no provision on how notice should be served on the document we have here.

In which case I don't think email is sufficient. Civil Procedure Rules 6 and Practice Direction 6A are relevant. Bolding is mine to highlight relevant bits

CPR_6.3 wrote:

(1) A claim form may (subject to Section IV of this Part and the rules in this Section relating to service out of the jurisdiction on solicitors, European Lawyers and parties) be served by any of the following methods –
(a) personal service in accordance with rule 6.5;
(b) first class post, document exchange or other service which provides for delivery on the next business day, in accordance with Practice Direction 6A;
(c) leaving it at a place specified in rule 6.7, 6.8, 6.9 or 6.10;
(d) fax or other means of electronic communication in accordance with Practice Direction 6A; or
(e) any method authorised by the court under rule 6.15.

PD_6A_para_4.2 wrote:

Subject to the provisions of rule 6.26(6) and (7), where a document is to be served by fax or other electronic means –
(a) the party who is to be served or the solicitor acting for that party must previously have indicated in writing to the party serving –
(i) that the party to be served or the solicitor is willing to accept service by fax or other electronic means; and

(ii) the fax number, e-mail address or other electronic identification to which it must be sent; and


(b) the following are to be taken as sufficient written indications for the purposes of paragraph 4.2(a) –
(i) a fax number set out on the writing paper of the solicitor acting for the party to be served;

(ii) an e-mail address set out on the writing paper of the solicitor acting for the party to be served but only where it is stated that the e-mail address may be used for service; or

(iii) a fax number, e-mail address or electronic identification set out on a statement of case or an answer to a claim filed with the court.

jjlandlord

What, if anything, did you reply to the landlord's email? (not necessarily by email but still in writing).

giruzz

jjlandlord wrote: »

What, if anything, did you reply to the landlord's email? (not necessarily by email but still in writing).

Hello,

Nothing written has gone out to the landlord. He emailed the notice and then called me twice.

The first time I asked to stay another couple of weeks and he said no at which point I put the phone down.

The second time he said he was going to post the notice letter in addition to the email he sent us. Given what rpc said above, I was hoping he didn't....

As mentioned on my first post, the lease started on the 19th of October 2012.

While writing this post (18/03/2014 - 18:37PM), we have not received anything by letter.

Given that our lease started on the 19/10 - I was wondering, what will happen if:

1) The LL drops notice under our door or on the front entrance and we don't receive it until tomorrow (19/03). Does it mean that we gain an extract month?

2) The LL has posted the letter and is delivered tomorrow or after the 19/03. Does it mean that we gain an extract month?

3) If the letter was posted yesterday by first class (17/03) how do we proof that nothing was received today (18/03)? We haven't got it....but I am wondering if the LL posted it after pickup time so it won't get delivered until the 19/03....

thanks....

Giruzz

RAS

The assumption is that first class mail is received two days after posting.

If nothing arrives in hard copy by 11.59pm tonight, then you get another month.