Tenant sends termination notice - landlord not home

blon

Ok, the break clause says
"The LL agrees that the Tenant has the right to terminate the Tenancy by giving the LL not less then 3 months notice in writing to be sent by first class post or hand delivery to the address specified in clause x.x. of the Agreement, to end the Tenancy."

Two things I notice:
1. It just says First Class mail, without specifying whether Signed For or not.
2. The address in clause x.x is an old one. They moved to a new address and never actually sent me their new address in written. However, I was able to deduce their new address from our conversations - I know it, but they never informed me properly in writing. As a result, I sent the letter as signed for first class mail to both the old and new address. The tracking to the new address confirmed that the letter is being returned due to the recipient having moved away.

Vectis

Send it again, first class, but with proof of postage. Proof of postage is free at Post Offices. I doubt if the LL will quibble over a day or two with 3 months notice.

G_M

blon wrote: »

Ok, the break clause says
"The LL agrees that the Tenant has the right to terminate the Tenancy by giving the LL not less then 3 months notice in writing to be sent by first class post or hand delivery to the address specified in clause x.x. of the Agreement, to end the Tenancy."

Two things I notice:
1. It just says First Class mail, without specifying whether Signed For or not.
2. The address in clause x.x is an old one. They moved to a new address and never actually sent me their new address in written. However, I was able to deduce their new address from our conversations - I know it, but they never informed me properly in writing. As a result, I sent the letter as signed for first class mail to both the old and new address. The tracking to the new address confirmed that the letter is being returned due to the recipient having moved away.

1) '1st class post' is 1st class post. 'Signed for' is signed for'. There is a clear distinction.

2) Had it been sent only to the address specified in clause x.x, by (unsigned for) 1st claoss pos, it would have been delivered, and therefore deemed served, unless of course the LL had provided in writing new address since the date the contract was signed.

If the LL fails to update the tenant with his address, that is the LL's problem, not the tenant's.

In this case, the tenant sensibly sent it to both addresses, thus covering himself - except that the letter was not served since it was sent 'signed for'.

However, are you perhaps over-worrying? What is your relationship like? Why not ring the LL, explain, give the date you wish to leave, and see how he responds? Most likely he'll say 'fine', and you then confirm inn writing!

thesaint

What is the actual name for "signed for" mail. If it is "First Class signed for", then your service is fine.

Members stating about what is acceptable methods of service are ignoring the contractual terms that you agreed to, which are in no way unfair.

I do think you may be over-thinking this though.

blon

@thesaint:
The "product name" for signed for is "Royal Mail Signed For (R) 1st class".

thesaint

Sounds fine to me.

blon

If you look at at how Royal Mail presents the two delivery services, http://www.royalmail.com/personal/uk-delivery/signed-for-1st-class and http://www.royalmail.com/personal/uk-delivery/1st-class-mail, Signed For is like 1st class but with added benefits such as proof of delivery which you don't have with 1st class. Your 1st class letter could be lost and you would not even it happened. It seems twisted to reject the validity of the superior product.

If you took the contractual terms literally, you could very well post it 1st class by dropping it in a postbox, without collecting proof of postage, and you would have fulfilled the contractual terms (contract does not explicitly mention to collect proof from post office). I always thought that any ambiguity in law must be filled with the good intentions behind a clause and that in my case it would be sensible to choose the more expensive, delivery-trackable product that also bears 1st class in the name.

audigex

Although in future it may be an idea to send it both regular First Class, and First Class Recorded. That way you're covered both ways....

Having worked in the post office, we always understood that First Class Recorded was a part of the First Class product, with an extra optional service attached.... I doubt a landlord would be able to get much in court with that argument.

Landofwood

G_M wrote: »

1) '1st class post' is 1st class post. 'Signed for' is signed for'. There is a clear distinction.

Hogwash. Stop confusing this matter.

G_M

So people are seriously suggesting that as a LL I would need my contract to read "served by unsigned for 1st class post"?

Hogwash.

If I want service by 1st class with the added benefit of recorded or whatever then that's what I should specify.