Landlord sells property and wants us out

nadirnwo

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

Did you know the property was up fro sale when you entered into this tenancy? If you didn't the landlord certain did.

For that reason I wouldn't go out of my way to be co-operative. Securing a new property and moving costs money, sometimes lots of it, and any tenant who knows they will definitely be on the move in a mere six month's time would likely choose another if they had a choice.

Landlord wants a sale but to be able to collect rent right up until the last moment at the same time. Eff him!

No, the LL and the agent told us that they were looking for someone who would hope to stay for 2-3 years. So when I was told in Jan that they are looking to sell the property it came as a big surprise.

G_M

nadirnwo wrote: »

Sorry, the exact wording is:

12.4: The Tenant may determine this tenancy on or after the sixth month of this tenancy by giving the Landlord or the Landlord's Agent not less than two (2) months notice in writing to that effect, the earliest such date for giving notice being on or after the sixth month of occupancy.

12.5): The Landlord may determine this tenancy on or after the sixth month of this tenancy by giving the Tenant not less than two (2) month's notice in writing from a rent due date to that effect, the earliest such date for giving notice being on or after the sixth month of occupancy.

As for the letter itself, it appears to have been hand delivered as there is no postage on it, so cannot say when it was actually served.

If dated 31st, and hand delivered, a court would assume it was served on 31st.

The Break Clause requires "two (2) month's notice" which would mean calender months. So the LL has complied with the Break Clause.

However as advised earlier the lack of s21 and the deposit issue make the point moot.

Since we are getting legalistic, the Break Clause is also poorly drafted. They often are.

The Tenant may determine this tenancy on or after the sixth month...

so in this case it could be ended on 19th March (provided 2 months notice is given).

the earliest such date for giving notice being on or after the sixth month

notice cannot be given till 19th March, so tenancy cannot end till 2 months later - 19th May.

???????

(but makes no difference to the current situation)

BitterAndTwisted

In which case sit tight and wait for the landlord to apply to the court for possession. Most courts are pretty busy and just getting a date could take a couple of months.

I reckon you'll still be in situ by July or August on the inside.

Meanwhile he loses his buyer.

G_M

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

In which case sit tight and wait for the landlord to apply to the court for possession. Most courts are pretty busy and just getting a date could take a couple of months.

I reckon you'll still be in situ by July or August on the inside.

Meanwhile he loses his buyer.

This is a certainly one option. But I repeat my first point (post 4):

Much depends what you want. And what your relationship is with the LL.

Automatically suggesting using every legal loophole or practical tactic to make the LL's life a misery is not necessarily the 'right' thing to do. There are many perfectly nice people who fall into letting their properties (or are forced to) and who are just that bit lax or ignorant. Indeed we see many coming here for help!

OP started by saying:

The LL is not cooperative at all. For example, they are insisting that we pay rent till the 31st of May and offer no flexibility in case we find something else a week or so earlier.

To be fair, providing 2 months notice in a S21 (if it had been a S21)and then offering to end the tenancy earlier, could compromise the 2 months! So a wise LL would simply give the stark 2 month S21.

That is not being 'uncooperative'. What would be uncooperative would be if the tenant then contacted the LL to discuss an earlier date by 'mutual agreement' and the LL refused.

Pixie5740

How could the LL prove that the notice was hand delivered on the 31st March if the OP wasn't there to sign for it?

As GM says I suppose it depends what you want to achieve. One way or another the LL will get you out even if it's months and months from now. In your position I would look for somewhere else to live and ask the LL to pay removal costs, new agency fees and for my deposit back now so I could use it for another place as well as an early termination of the lease otherwise no dice.

jjlandlord

Pixie5740 wrote: »

How could the LL prove that the notice was hand delivered on the 31st March if the OP wasn't there to sign for it?

Witness statement that it was left at property.

jjlandlord

nadirnwo wrote: »

12.5): The Landlord may determine this tenancy on or after the sixth month of this tenancy by giving the Tenant not less than two (2) month's notice in writing from a rent due date to that effect, the earliest such date for giving notice being on or after the sixth month of occupancy.

I would read that as meaning that notice must be given on rent due date only (ie. it seems 1st of the month), so you could argue that notice is invalid.

Note that such notice needs not mention s.21 if its purpose is clear and if it does comply with the requirements of section 21.

Pixie5740

jjlandlord wrote: »

Witness statement that it was left at property.

Thanks, I was just curious.

nadirnwo

Thank you all for your comments. This does help to clear some things up. I guess it does come down to what I hope to achieve. I am not fussed about moving and I dont want the LL's sale to fall through. However, the LL is not responding to email or phone calls and their past behaviour towards us has not been helpful. I just do not trust that they I will be treated fairly when the time comes to return the deposit as they have had little urgency in trying to protect it and issuing prescribed information.

Would it be a fair compromise to ask for a return of the deposit and I agree to leave by the 31st of May that they have requested, rather than getting into the nitty gritty of whether the notice is appropriate, etc? Also, the notice they sent mentions only one of the tenants and is not addressed to the other signatory in case that has any impact?

Finst

nadirnwo wrote: »

Would it be a fair compromise to ask for a return of the deposit and I agree to leave by the 31st of May that they have requested, rather than getting into the nitty gritty of whether the notice is appropriate, etc? Also, the notice they sent mentions only one of the tenants and is not addressed to the other signatory in case that has any impact?

Return of the full deposit now and a good reference? Were I in your position I would be happy with that outcome, provided I could find somewhere else to rent (which should be perfectly possible by the end of May?)