SPT notice period

roberttenant1

Hello, hopefully someone can clarify.

I'm on a SPT (Month to month) tenancy at the moment. My tenancy agreement states i have to give 60 days notice. Is this really neccessary ?

My tenancy period runs from 3rd to 3rd of each month. I plan to give notice on 28 Sep, pay my last rent on 3rd Oct, and lave before 3rd Nov. Am I within my rights to do so?

Can my rental agency hold my deposit because I fail to give 60 days notice? And could someone point me to the scriptures in law which override their 60 day requirement ? Thank you

Pixie5740

Your tenancy period will run from 3rd to the 2nd, not 3rd to 3rd.

If your original tenancy agreement states that you must give 60 days notice then you might have a Contractual Periodic Tenancy rather than a Statutory Periodic Tenancy. Can you confirm that you are in England or Wales?

See Ending/Renewing an AST for further information.

roberttenant1

I'm in England. My tenancy agreement clearly states AST followed by an SPT. I have no idea what a contractual periodic tenancy would be.

franklee

roberttenant1 wrote: »

I'm in England. My tenancy agreement clearly states AST followed by an SPT. I have no idea what a contractual periodic tenancy would be.

Can you post the wording in your tenancy agreement where that's stated?

A SPT arises in the absence of any other tenancy. This won't happen and it will be a CPT if the tenancy agreement allows for the tenancy to continue after the fixed term by saying something along the lines of a term for 12 months followed by month to month.

The difference matters as if it's a CPT you have to give notice as per the tenancy agreement.

If it's a SPT then you have to give the statutory notice, minimum one whole period, and the terms for giving notice in the agreement no longer apply.

So best to post your wording to see what you've got. Just the paragraphs around where it it defines the fixed term and says what if anything it's followed by.

Pixie5740

roberttenant1 wrote: »

I'm in England. My tenancy agreement clearly states AST followed by an SPT. I have no idea what a contractual periodic tenancy would be.

Read the link I provided you with. It explains what a CPT is there.

roberttenant1

franklee. Based on your words it looks like it's a CPT.... crap. Although I still find it confusing because the tenancy starts of like this:

"1. You are signing a contract for an initial term of 6 months. You cannot get out of the contract during that period.
2. You have to give 60 days notice to end the tenancy. If you want to leave at the end
of the initial term, you must give notice 60 days before the end in writing.
3. If you don’t give notice, your tenancy will automatically become a statutory periodic
(month by month) tenancy, and continue on that basis until you or the landlord gives
notice. "

They clearly state it becomes a "statutory periodic (month by month) tenancy" which I take to mean SPT.... but a few lines further down it says:

"If the tenancy continues beyond the certain term it will become a Periodic Tenancy. The tenants will be required to issue 60 days notice to end the tenancy either during the certain term or the Periodic stage. A tenancy cannot be ended before the end of the certain term."

So I guess this implies it's a CPT ???:( How would notice work here then ? if it's 60 days what rent would I have to pay... as my rental agreement is paid per month not per day ??

Pixie5740

2) is horlicks. You don't need to give notice to end a fixed period tenancy regardless of what the tenancy agreement says.

I think the 60 days notice was in relation to the end of the fixed period not the periodic tenancy. Meaning you give a months notice (as you pay your rent monthly) coinciding with your rental period 3rd to 2nd. That said there's nothing stopping you giving more notice if you want.

roberttenant1

Thanks, it's what I thought. I can understand my agent, they want as much time as possible... and for tenants that are not in the know on tenancy laws (which is probably most tenants), it's an easy rip-off. It's a business strategy but does not reflect the law. I had a feeling the agreement was fishy from the start.

I'll provide one months notice as described and hope they don't steal my deposit. If they try to argue, small claims court will be the only way out. I don't care for their reference as I'm leaving the country.

G_M

roberttenant1 wrote: »

franklee. Based on your words it looks like it's a CPT.... crap.
I think not.
Although I still find it confusing because the tenancy starts of like this:

"1. You are signing a contract for an initial term of 6 months. You cannot get out of the contract during that period.
That is clear and unambiguous
2. You have to give 60 days notice to end the tenancy. If you want to leave at the end of the initial term, you must give notice 60 days before the end in writing.
This clause is unenforcible, but in any case is now irrelevant since the fixed term has already ended.
The 60 days notice does not apply to any subsequent periodic tenancy since it clearly refers to the 'initial term'
3. If you don’t give notice, your tenancy will automatically become a statutory periodic (month by month) tenancy, and continue on that basis until you or the landlord gives notice. "
This is also clear and unambiguous.
Its is a SPT, not a CPT, so notice is as defined by the Housing Act 2008 (see the earlier link).
They clearly state it becomes a "statutory periodic (month by month) tenancy" which I take to mean SPT.... but a few lines further down it says:

"If the tenancy continues beyond the certain term it will become a Periodic Tenancy. The tenants will be required to issue 60 days notice to end the tenancy either during the certain term or the Periodic stage. A tenancy cannot be ended before the end of the certain term."
This is where the ambiguity arises.
This clauses contradicts the earlier one, and defines any subsequent periodic tenany as Contactual, requiring 60 days notice.

So I guess this implies it's a CPT ???:( How would notice work here then ? if it's 60 days what rent would I have to pay... as my rental agreement is paid per month not per day ??

Because the tenancy is so badly worded, it is unclear if it is Statutory, or Contractual.

There are two ways to get an answer:

1) discuss, and reach an agreement with the landlord
2) go to court and ask a judge to decide.

It is impossible to be sure how a judge would decide, but often where there is a contradiction in a contract, they decide in favour of the person who did not write the contract. In this case (I assume) the landlord wrote the contract so the court is likely to interpret the notice period as being the shorter of SPT and CPT.

But it is not guaranteed.

franklee

I agree with G_M. The two clauses contradict each other so it should go in favour of the tenant as the consumer who didn't draw up the contract. Even if it's the standard agency contract that still counts as the LL's given the agent is the agent of the LL.

What I'd suggest is should your notice be challenged and they try to take rent in lieu out of the deposit then raise a dispute with the deposit scheme. Point out the contract days it's an SPT and also this about a SPT:

Housing Act 1988
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/50/section/5

"5 Security of tenure.

(3)The periodic tenancy referred to in subsection (2) above is one—

...snip...

e)under which, subject to the following provisions of this Part of this Act, the other terms are the same as those of the fixed term tenancy immediately before it came to an end, except that any term which makes provision for determination by the landlord or the tenant shall not have effect while the tenancy remains an assured tenancy."

I take it you have checked the deposit is in a scheme etc?

G_M

franklee wrote: »

What I'd suggest is should your notice be challenged and they try to take rent in lieu out of the deposit then raise a dispute with the deposit scheme. Point out the contract days it's an SPT and also this about a SPT:

in the event of a dispute over return of the deposit, I wonder whether OP would not do better declining the deposit scheme resolution process and going to court....?

It's a fine legal argument, and the arbitrators are not specialists in that area.