Moving out of rental property before end of tenancy - landlord's rights

davidwoody

Hi guys,

Hoping for some advice if possible.

We purchased a house on 16th January last month. Prior to that we were in a rental property.

We were on a rolling STP in our old rental property. Our rental period ran from the 1st January, so we were desperately trying to exchange before then so we could give notice and only pay rent up until the end of January.

We had a few problems leading up to the exchange, and were only able to exchange the day before completion (15th January).

The week before this, we asked our agent to tell our landlord that we were looking at exchanging on a property, to try and give them some warning and build up some goodwill in case they would be willing to allow us to leave the tenancy early. We were buying through the same estate agent as the one we rent through.

Once we had exchanged, our letting agent told us we needed to hand our notice in and pay rent up until the end of the next rental period, unless they could get new tenants in.

We handed our notice in on the 16th Jan, and after tidying and making good the house, handed the keys in on the 22nd Jan.

Since then, I've been in contact with the letting agent on a number of occasions, asking them if the landlord was putting the house back on the market. They kept saying that they were waiting for instruction from the landlord.

I saw that the house had gone back on the market today, and decided to swing by the house after work as it looked like new pictures of the house had been taken (with furniture). I only live around the corner. The lights were on so I knocked on the door.

The landlord was there, undertaking work on the property. They said that they were just doing a few small things to the property before getting it back on the market. I took some pictures before entering the property as evidence they were there.

This seems profoundly unfair and immoral to me - the landlord has sat on the property for close to 20 days whilst we have been paying rent, made no real effort to find new tenants and has been accessing the house to carry out work on it.

As far as I can tell, the actions of the landlord show that they have accepted our surrender of the tenancy by their actions through operation of law. Is this correct? Is there any grounds for us trying to recover any rent for this period that the landlord has been accessing the property?

Thanks for any advice!

agrinnall

The LL is entitled to rent up to the appropriate point in your tenancy (which is probably 28th Feb), and if you have surrendered the property he can do what he likes with it without reference or recompense to you. The "unless they could get new tenants in" bit is probably LA bullsh1t to keep you sweet while you complete on the property you were buying so they make sure they get their commission. Forget it and move on.

pyueck

For a periodic tenancy the landlord needs a months notice, any surrender before this is goodwill. Can't really see you have been unfairly treated, but make sure you get in writing your notice and end date.

G_M

davidwoody wrote: »

.
We were on a rolling STP in our old rental property. Our rental period ran from the 1st January,
so 1st to last of each month

Once we had exchanged, our letting agent told us we needed to hand our notice in and pay rent up until the end of the next rental period, unless they could get new tenants in.
Confimed in writing?

We handed our notice in on the 16th Jan,
saying what? Presumably to end the tenancy on 28th Feb?
Did you make any reference to the earlier (verbal? informal?) agreement regarding new tenants?

and after tidying and making good the house, handed the keys in on the 22nd Jan.
What was said/done when you handed the keys in?
Did you get a receipt? Did it mention tenancy surrender?

....asking them if the landlord was putting the house back on the market. They kept saying that they were waiting for instruction from the landlord.
Naturally. Without that they can do nothing.

I saw that the house had gone back on the market today,

The landlord was there, undertaking work on the property. They said that they were just doing a few small things to the property before getting it back on the market. I took some pictures before entering the property as evidence they were there.
I assume this is what you want. The property done up and put back on the market, yes?

This seems profoundly unfair and immoral to me
????
- the landlord has sat on the property for close to 20 days
perhaps he was busy? Or on holiday? Why should he work to your timetable....?
whilst we have been paying rent, made no real effort to find new tenants and has been accessing the house to carry out work on it.
I thought you wanted him to re-let the property? So accessing the property seems to be to your advantage.

As far as I can tell, the actions of the landlord show that they have accepted our surrender of the tenancy by their actions through operation of law. Is this correct? Is there any grounds for us trying to recover any rent for this period that the landlord has been accessing the property?

Thanks for any advice!

You appear to have double standards. There are 2 options:

1) you rely on the notice you served which (presumably) ends the tenancy at the end of Feb, and you pay rent till then.

2) you rely on the agreement for the tenancy to be surrendered early when new tenants move in. In that case you must permit access for cleaning/renovating/preparation for marketing, and then must allow access by prospective tenants to view. You must pay rent till the new tenants move in (since that seems to be what was agreed).

Your issue seems to be the time-scale, but as no agreement was made as to how quickly the property would be marketed I don't see what grounds you have to complain. It is normal for there to be a 'void' period between tenant during which LLs do minor, or major renovations ready for the new tenants.

davidwoody

Okay, thanks for the advice guys. Perhaps I've been looking at it the wrong way and agree there is some element of double standards to my thinking.

I'm frustrated with the situation of having to pay rent on an unoccupied property, but I guess these are the costs that are associated with property.

davidwoody

Btw, I'd misread a few articles about tenancy surrender which led me down this route.

[grr. can't post links]

I thought that by handing my keys back, I was surrendering the tenancy, and by the landlord entering the property etc that they were accepting that surrender and there wouldn't be any rent after that - I take it that I've completely misinterpreted that then!

Smi1er

You gave as little notice as possible.


If my tenant came to me and said we looking at buying a property (and were on a SPT) my reply would be along the lines of no problem. Thanks for letting me know, let me know when you have an offer accepted, ask for a 2 week completion and let me know when you exchange. If they did this, and were flexible with viewings after they exchange, then I would charge them rent until they gave me my keys back.


If they told me nothing, and told me the week before exchange with a day to completion then I would be charging rent for full notice.

AdrianC

"immoral" is a very strong word to be throwing around...