'have to' renew tenancy

mrginge

Guest101 wrote: »

:beer::beer::beer: - and me!

But perhaps we have a convert?

I actually agreed with one of your posts the other day. :eek:

Couldn't bring myself to admit it though.

Guest101

mrginge wrote: »

I actually agreed with one of your posts the other day. :eek:

Couldn't bring myself to admit it though.

HAHA :j

- made my day (yes, it's not difficult!)

ShAnE

thesaint wrote: »

Do you have any figures to back up this offensive comment?

Find us a letting agent who actively informs tenants that they do not need to take out a new fixed term contract if they would prefer to switch to an AST.

I'm sure if you are willing to do the impossible then somebody else would be willing to find you official statistics on the ratio of lying agents:squeaky clean agents.

denialanderror

I don't mean to sound patronising but do check in the pack of papers you'd likely have got from the agency when you moved in that there isn't a Section 21 notice already in there.

I've lived in a few properties rented through different agencies where the notice is served with the same date as the start of the tenancy, which I assume means they can evict you either on the end date of the tenancy or shortly after...

Pixie5740

denialanderror wrote: »

I don't mean to sound patronising but do check in the pack of papers you'd likely have got from the agency when you moved in that there isn't a Section 21 notice already in there.

I've lived in a few properties rented through different agencies where the notice is served with the same date as the start of the tenancy, which I assume means they can evict you either on the end date of the tenancy or shortly after...

Whilst some landlords and letting agencies might do this it's actually pointless. A valid Section 21 cannot be issued before the deposit is protected. So a Section 21 issued at the same time as the tenancy agreement and when the deposit is collected, but not yet protected, would be invalid.

G_M

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Whilst some landlords and letting agencies might do this it's actually pointless. A valid Section 21 cannot be issued before the deposit is protected. So a Section 21 issued at the same time as the tenancy agreement and when the deposit is collected, but not yet protected, would be invalid.

Plus even if no deposit is taken, or it was taken earlier and already protected, a valid S21 cannot be served till the tenancy agreement has started.

If it is served before the keys are handed over, it is invalid.

thesaint

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Whilst some landlords and letting agencies might do this it's actually pointless. A valid Section 21 cannot be issued before the deposit is protected. So a Section 21 issued at the same time as the tenancy agreement and when the deposit is collected, but not yet protected, would be invalid.

You are incorrect. A Sec 21 can be served validly on day 1 even if the deposit was only protected on day 30.

G_M wrote: »

If it is served before the keys are handed over, it is invalid.

Not at all.

Guest101

thesaint wrote: »

You are incorrect. A Sec 21 can be served validly on day 1 even if the deposit was only protected on day 30.



Not at all.

A section 21 cannot be valid if the deposit is not protected.

Seems very straight forward to me.

You saying 'not at all', is hardly explaining your position.

jjlandlord

Guest101 wrote: »

A section 21 cannot be valid if the deposit is not protected.

Thesaint is right on that one.

owl_lover

Definitely no section 21 in our case.
But I'm still confused about giving notice
Would this clause from our contract apply? Or only when we were 4 months into a periodic tenancy?


' it has been agreed that either party may give 2 months written notice to terminate this agreement, provided that an intial 4 months has already been served'.

Thanks