Cannot commit to new 6 month term - LL reluctant to accept statutory periodic

Jimmcwibb

Hi all,

I came to the end of my assured shorthold tenancy on the 11th of June 2015, and the agent sent us a new 6 month fixed term contract to sign. However, I am in the position where I am not sure I can commit to a new fixed term. I emailed the agent requesting they ask the landlord if it is ok if we stay on the statutory periodic tenancy which arose at the end of the fixed term, or alternatively we could sign a contractual periodic contract. The reply I got today was this

Dear Mr XXXXX and Miss XXXXXX


With reference to your email of the 29th June, and my reply to you of 30th June 2015, I have now had final instructions from your landlord in the matter of renewal of contract.

Your landlord is unable to offer to you a statutory periodic tenancy, due partly to the lack of rent guarantee insurance being available on this tenancy type.

Legally, your tenancy expired on 11 June 2015 and you remain in the property on an authorised basis, not a periodic.

If you wish to renew the tenancy for the term previously agreed with you, i.e. a six month term from 28 June 2015, then please sign and return the tenancy agreements sent to you on 11 June 2015, no later than 5.00pm on Friday 10th July 2015.

If you now intend to leave, then please confirm the date on which you will be vacating, together with your forwarding address and instructions concerning the keys. This is without prejudice to our client’s legal position.

Please ensure that you confirm you intentions to us by 5.00pm on Friday 10th July 2015.

If we do not hear from you by this point, we are instructed to seek an order for possession and costs through the County Court, without further notice to you.

We hope that this course of action can be avoided.

Yours sincerely

Now I'm unsure of how to proceed. I am confused at some of the language used, for example "Legally, your tenancy expired on 11 June 2015 and you remain in the property on an authorised basis, not a periodic." doesn't fit with anything I've read about what happens at the end of an assured shorthold tenancy.

Other relevant information is that we were served a section 21 the last time we renewed the contract, and I am unsure if this section 21 is still valid or whether they would have to issue a new one.

Really, the underlying thing is that we want to stay, we want to pay the LL rent, we have never been a problem, we're just unsure about how much longer we can stay. We could stay for at LEAST another 3 months, possibly 6, and possibly even more than that.

What is the best way forward?

Thanks,
Alex

thesaint

Tell them that you are willing to sign another tenancy agreement with a fixed term of 3 months.

Pixie5740

That email just shows the letting agent to be an ignoramus.

You are not remaining in the property on an "authorised basis" whatever that means, you have a valid periodic tenancy agreement. Whether it's Statutory or Contractual will depend on what it says (if anything) in your original tenancy agreement.

Read G_M's guide to Ending/Renewing an AST.

The Section 21 you received last time you renewed could be valid but even so it can take a while to physically get you out of the property legally.

There's a chance that all this bluster is coming from the letting agent rather than the landlord so it might be worth contacting the landlord directly.

theartfullodger

The landlord does not get a choice: An SPT happened on 12th June: That is the Law.

Agent may be bluffing about eviction,

In your shoes I would ignore them it is likely to take them 3 months-ish to get you out if they do decide to go the court route.

Was depsoit protected within 30 days of you paying & have you been served with "Prescribed information" about it?? (if no to either any s21 will be invalid so longer to evict you/..)

fairy_lights

Bullpoop. You're on a periodic tenancy and they're either lying to get you to re-sign (are they asking for a few, too?) or completely ignorant.

mrginge

FWIW that doesn't sound like a bluff to me.
Who is the agent?
Can you establish which rent gurantee scheme they could be using and find the t&c?

Perhaps you should also pull your finger out of your backside and make a decision about your future?

Guest101

Legally, your tenancy expired on 11 June 2015 and you remain in the property on an authorised basis, not a periodic.

Buahahahahaha

Purely on the basis of this statement I would ignore the agent.

franklee

You need to check if the section 21 notice is valid. Was it served after the renewal tenancy started? If it was enclosed with the renewal paperwork it was likely served too soon. Was the deposit protected and prescribed information served correctly? Are the dates on the section 21 notice correct? These are all things that can make the S21 invalid.

Presumably the section 21 notice asked for possession after the end of the renewal fixed term so that the notice period is over? If so and the section 21 notice is valid then the LL can indeed seek an order for possession and costs through the county court, without further notice to you.

Options are to get in contact with the LL and see if he will let the periodic tenancy run on. (You are on a periodic tenancy as everyone else has confirmed already).

Maybe offer to pay an extra months rent upfront front to compensate the LL for the loss of rent guarantee insurance, point out your good payment history and that it seems silly to evict a perfectly good tenant thus ensuring rent payments will stop until the new tenant can move in.

Or offer to sign a shorter renewal as already suggested.

At the end of the day if the LL/agent are determined to evict you for this they will succeed. It's using the section 21 notice as a "Sword of Damocles" to make you play ball but that's legal I'm afraid.

lighting_up_the_chalice

S21 has to be unequivocal. The offer of a further fixed term has made it very equivocal and, as a result, invalid.

jjlandlord

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

S21 has to be unequivocal. The offer of a further fixed term has made it very equivocal and, as a result, invalid.

Nope, this does not invalidate the notice.

franklee

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

S21 has to be unequivocal. The offer of a further fixed term has made it very equivocal and, as a result, invalid.

Yep I agree with that and I've seen it said on e.g. Painsmiths blog however some other forum members here disagree. Neither side has produced any case law either way, that may be as no one has consented it at a high enough level?

It doesn't prevent the agent carrying out their threat to "seek an order for possession and costs through the County Court, without further notice" but it may mean that the judge doesn't award costs against the tenant or grant the possession order.

It would be useful if we knew the direct results of a tenant putting this argument forward in the county court but maybe the OP doesn't want the hassle?

The problem is once it gets to court you cannot be absolutely sure which way the judge will go if depending on one of the finer points rather than something straightforward like dates etc.

Still may be worth a letter to the agents though but then then can just serve a fresh section 21 and the OP would be back to square one but with an extra two months to arrange his move.