Deed of Surrender

Diatomical

Hi,

We have a 12 month rental contract with no break clause at 6 months. We have been in the property for 8 months and have now found a home to buy. We approached the LL to break the agreement early and he agreed as long as we paid him 2 months rent (£3400) as a charge and to cover his risk.

I appreciate that there is probably nothing we can do other than to pay the charge and I am all for paying reasonable costs to cover his expenses of finding new tenant. That being said, the law seems to favour the LL and is not fair to tenants. I offered to find a suitable tenant to replace us but he said he wanted to find someone himself as he wasn't happy with his current estate agents and that it would take time once we vacate to change agents and find someone. He also made us agree to some building work being done before we leave (it wasn't that disruptive, but just felt like another condition we couldn't say no too without him changing his mind on us terminating early).

After agreeing to all these terms he then marketed the property with the same agents he said he was changing and a new tenant has already made an offer to rent the property.

So his risk is now zero and he pockets £3400 for us terminating early with a new tenant moving in as soon as we leave. To me 'reasonable costs' should apply to both parties and not just the LL.

I personally wouldn't feel comfortable taking other peoples money like that but maybe that's just me. Also, what is the law should the LL want to sell his property within the 12 month contract period...does he then pay me a fee of my choice for the outstanding months to be able to sell? I doubt it.

I have till this weekend to pay the £3400 plus the estate agents £150 for Deed of surrender admin costs. I know there is probably nothing I can do but pay up.

mrginge

Lets say that you had agreed to rent a property for 12 months.
If the LL came to you and said he wanted to kick you out after 8 months you would not be happy. You would expect the law to protect you and the LL to have to fulfil the obligations that he agreed to. You would of course be entitled to offer to vacate for any amount of compensation you saw fit.
You could for example ask for two months rent. The LL would either agree and you would then leave, or they may decline and you would continue to live in the property until such time as the LL could legally evict you.


In your situation the LL is under no obligation to allow you to break your contract and you should consider that two months rent is better than having to pay four months.

DTDfanBoy

If the LL is foolish enough to sell the property with vacant possesion while you still residing in it on a 12 month contract, they probably will have to pay you a fee of your choosing :beer:

Would you be complaining more or less if the LL hadn't agreed to an early surrender and you had to pay another £3,400 :cool:

Diatomical

@mrgringe, I didn't know the same would apply if LL wanted to sell. So thanks for that and I appreciate that 2 months is better than 4.

I just know that if the shoe was on the other foot, I would refund old tenant if I got new tenants in straight away...but again, that's just me. I wouldn't want to profit from anyone, especially if they have been good tenants and my costs are covered.

@DTDfanBoy, you are right...I shouldn't be complaining. £6,800 would be heaps worse

Thanks for the responses and hopefully others find this post useful.

ashleyj722

If there is a no break clause after 6 months then you don't have to pay him anything as you've been there for 8 months right? I would let him keep the deposit instead.

mrginge

ashleyj722 wrote: »

If there is a no break clause after 6 months then you don't have to pay him anything as you've been there for 8 months right? I would let him keep the deposit instead.

Its a 12 month contract.

Pixie5740

This property you've found to buy....have you actually exchanged yet?

G_M

ashleyj722 wrote: »

If there is a no break clause after 6 months then you don't have to pay him anything as you've been there for 8 months right? I would let him keep the deposit instead.

??? Makes no sense at all. Either legally, or practically.

The law is perfectly fair diatomical - you both agreed (contractually) to a 12 month contract.

Neither of you can alter that without the other's agreement. Neither of you is obliged to agree an alteration. Either of you can suggest an alteration, and suggest whatever conditions you wish. The other can either agree, or not.

It is perfectly fair on both sides.

As explained, if the LL sold the property during a tenant's 12 month contract, the new owner would become the tenant's landlord for the remainder of the 12 months enancy - and beyond (unless, as explained above, an alternative agreement was reached).