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

Jimmcwibb

Well, I sent a reply quoting a whole bunch of different sources saying there is no minimum term, and how contractual periodic tenancies work. And I requested they ask the landlord whether a 3 month fixed term contract would be acceptable, again.

I'm afraid this is all getting a bit crazy.

mrginge

thesaint wrote: »

They have a guarantee of rent for three months instead of the current rent situation where they are only certain of rent for another month.

Which at the end of, the OP can leave with no notice, creating a guaranteed void.

And which the LL will presumably have to pay a renewal fee to the LA for, which will be repeated just three months later.

And after which, the LL cannot evict under s.21 for another 3 months, thereby potentially putting themselves in a worse position than they are now.

Plus of course the LL already has effectively a guaranteed two months rent now unless the OP gets alternative accomodation and hands in their notice in the next three days. Something which is not going to happen since the OP cannot commit to six months in this house, so is not going to sign up for six months somewhere else.

Jimmcwibb

So this is the reply:

Thank you for your reply.

If a term shorter than six months is executed, the landlord cannot seek possession until the end of the sixth month. This is not acceptable to our client’s mortgage lender, nor our rent insurers.

A contractual (Non Housing Act tenancy) can be for any length, although again not acceptable to our clients mortgage lender or our insurers as it falls outside of the 1988 Housing Act.

Our client is simply not prepared to allow you to remain in the property on whatever basis you see fit, particularly in view of the fact that her security is reduced and her position compromised.

The offer made to you is final and not open to further negotiation.

I look forward to this matter being concluded no later than 5.00pm on Friday 10th July 2015, after which time we are instructed to proceed with court action to recover possession of the property.

Yours sincerely

G_M

A contractual periodic tenancy can be/is still an Assured Shorthold Tenancy under the Housing Act 1998.

They are either totally ignorant, or deliberately lying.

However, they are not about to give way are they? So, either do as they wish, or stick to your guns, wait for a S21 (which might or might not come), and then either move out or contest the S21 (which might or might not be ruled valid).

edit: oops! 1988.

Jimmcwibb

I'm currently thinking that I really have no option than to sign the 6 month contract and then in the future pay to get out of it, if I need to.

I think they've won.

Is it worth pushing this?: (from landlordlawblog)

Under this section, where a tenant does not know his landlords name and address, he can request this in writing from the landlord’s agent or the person who collects the rent.

Once the request is made, this person must provide the information, in writing, within 21 days.

If he fails to provide the information ‘without reasonable excuse’ then this is a criminal offence punishable by a fine.

thesaint

mrginge wrote: »

Which at the end of, the OP can leave with no notice, creating a guaranteed void.

So, to make it clear, you are saying a 3 month fixed term is no better for a landlord than a statutory periodic tenacy?

Jimmcwibb wrote: »

So this is the reply:

If a term shorter than six months is executed, the landlord cannot seek possession until the end of the sixth month.

This is not the case for a replacement tenancy, for which yours is.

Jimmcwibb

thesaint wrote: »

This is not the case for a replacement tenancy, for which yours is.

And in any case, a 6 month AST has that same drawback.

This has everything to do with the agent wants me to do and nothing to do with what's best for the LL/tenant.

mrginge

thesaint wrote: »

So, to make it clear, you are saying a 3 month fixed term is no better for a landlord than a statutory periodic tenacy?

Pretty much.

fairy_lights

Jimmcwibb wrote: »

I'm currently thinking that I really have no option than to sign the 6 month contract and then in the future pay to get out of it, if I need to.

I think they've won.

Is it worth pushing this?: (from landlordlawblog)

I would definitely push them for the landlords contact details and speak to him/her directly - for all you know everything the agent is telling you about what the landlord will or wont do could be a pack of lies.

thesaint

Jimmcwibb wrote: »

And in any case, a 6 month AST has that same drawback.

This has everything to do with the agent wants me to do and nothing to do with what's best for the LL/tenant.

It's easy for me to say, but I would do nothing and let them take further action.

mrginge wrote: »

Pretty much.

Glad you clarified. I now know it's safe to ignore anything you say, as you have no idea what you are talking about.