Rent contract renewal due but never signed the previous contract

Guest101

sky_rat wrote: »

Sorry G_M I wasn't suggesting you were wrong or needed reassuring from someone else !

I have read the link (and the link about rent increase)... I just wanted to clarify that my understanding is correct. I just want to be sure as I dont want to risk loosing the property and having to find an alternative and move (I am reluctant to move again until I am able to buy a house).

BUT more importantly, I wanted an opinion about whether the landlady / letting agent is likely to end the tenancy if I insisted on SPT and refused to pay the £10 increase in rent. Especially considering the points I made:

i.e.
1. I've been a good tenant for the last 2 years
2. I have always paid my rent on time
3. The cost of finding a new tenant will cost more than the £10 a month rise in rent

If you want security, pay the fee, sign the contract and job done.

If you want monthly, be prepared to move.

You cannot have it both ways.

I dont know what your LL is likely to do, i dont know them.

equally it sounds like:
1: no rent increase in 2 weeks
2: you're doing what your obliged to, there's no round of applause for that
3: Probably, but it's £120 a year. They could find a tenant who stays 5 years, that's £600, much more than a new tenant finding fee (well outside london)

sky_rat

And this is why I wish I could afford to buy a property instead of being forced to waste money on rent gggggggrrrrrrrr

G_M

As guest101 says, we don't know your landlord/agent.

Your understanding is correct. As is your logic regarding the likelyhood of the LL evicting.

But I put that warning into the linked post because tenants should be aware that going down the periodic tenancy route is, by definition, less seure than a fixed term tenancy. A LL can serve 2 months notice at any time.

Whether they will depends on .... the landlord. Or, more worryingly, his agent, in those cases where landlords have totally delegated all responsibility /decision-making to their agent.

sky_rat

The ironic thing is I never signed the renewal contract last year. Therefore it is not legally binding, so in effect I have been on a statutory periodic tenancy for the last 12 months anyway ! No one chased me for not signing and retuning the renewal contract. The letting agent got their extortionate fee of £125 for re-printing the same contract so I guess thats the main thing they were bothered about. And this is why I am less keen to pay another £125 fee because the letting agent didn't do their job for the last contract renewal.

martindow

I was wondering what would happen if the OP started paying the increased rent without paying a renewal fee or signing a new contract.

Would the change of rent imply a new fixed term contract and security of tenure for at least 6 months?

G_M

sky_rat wrote: »

The ironic thing is I never signed the renewal contract last year. Therefore it is not legally binding, so in effect I have been on a statutory periodic tenancy for the last 12 months anyway ! No one chased me for not signing and retuning the renewal contract. The letting agent got their extortionate fee of £125 for re-printing the same contract .

Even though you did not sign, a court would be likely (though nothing is certain) to view your payment of the £125 renewal fee as being acceptance of .... renewal.

So chances are you have not been on a SPT for the last 12 months.

I was wondering what would happen if the OP started paying the increased rent without paying a renewal fee or signing a new contract.

Would the change of rent imply a new fixed term contract and security of tenure for at least 6 months?

Again, as with my comment above, a court would look at the circumstances and decide. I suspect that if the renewal fee was not paid (but the new rent was), then given that there is a history of charging a renewal fee for renewals, the court would conclude no fixed term renewal took place, but an agreement for a higher rent did take place.

But this is somewhat less certain than the previous conjecture...

macman

As above, you don't need a signed contract for there to be a bindingcontract: acceptance of the terms would be implied by payment of the consideration (the fee) in this case.