Forced For Another 12 Months

Marvel1

The agent wants the 12 months for the fee.

Now imo, if the landlord insists on the 12 months, why don't they pay the fee? (Don't suggest to this to the landlord though). I would speak to the landlord directly and as above you would prefer monthly.

G_M

Read:

* Ending/renewing an AST: what happens when a fixed term ends? How can a LL or tenant end a tenancy? What is a periodic tenancy?

RadicalRooster_2

Thank you all for your replies.

The agent has come back and said the land lord wants a 12 month renewal or we have to give notice.

Unsure where we stand now as surely the LL has broken the original contract?

Any suggestions?

Miss_Samantha

If you are happy to renew for 12 months then just reply so but makes clear that this is conditional to the landlord paying all fees since he requires it.
If they say no then do nothing at all.

Guest101

RadicalRooster wrote: »

Thank you all for your replies.

The agent has come back and said the land lord wants a 12 month renewal or we have to give notice.

Unsure where we stand now as surely the LL has broken the original contract?

Any suggestions?

If you want 12 months, then sign
if you want monthly then do nothing
if you want to leave, leave before the fixed term expires. (no notice)
If you've been there over 12 months and want to leave give notice

Pixie5740

In what way has the landlord broken the original contract? (I'll give you a clue....he hasn't.)

The agent is incorrect. You have more options than just sign another 12 months or give notice. Sometimes it's best to do nothing at all. Let them serve notice and see if they are willing to go to court to evict decent tenants. Alternatively, do as Miss Samantha suggests and agree to the new 12 month fixed term if the landlord is willing to pay the associated fees. If you do agree to a new fixed term then check for break clauses.

always_sunny

If you do nothing and it's past the existing AST date, it will become periodic. Though EA and LL (in London/SE) usually are keen to always have fixed 12 months AST rather than allow them to become periodic.

So more likely you will get a S21 advising you of the AST termination if you do not wish to renew. The LL can't just say 'no', s/he has to do the applicable dance with paperwork, etc... though within their rights (sadly). All my previous LL never allowed periodic tenancy, 12 months AST and S21 just before in case I didn't renew!

Pixie5740

always_sunny wrote: »

If you do nothing and it's past the existing AST date, it will become periodic. Though EA and LL (in London/SE) usually are keen to always have fixed 12 months AST rather than allow them to become periodic.

So more likely you will get a S21 advising you of the AST termination if you do not wish to renew. The LL can't just say 'no', s/he has to do the applicable dance with paperwork, etc... though within their rights (sadly). All my previous LL never allowed periodic tenancy, 12 months AST and S21 just before in case I didn't renew!

A Section 21 does not end a tenancy. It is merely notice that a landlord might got to court to get an eviction notice (all explained in G_M's link). Unless you were willing to call the landlord's bluff you have no way of knowing whether the landlord would have gone as far as applying for an eviction notice.

It would be uneconomical for a landlord to pay the letting agent to take you to court and pay the letting agent another tenant renewal fee. It would be far more economical to allow a paying tenant remain on a periodic tenancy.

You obviously weren't feeling lucky...punk.

anotheruser

An old estate agent did this to us.
We just wrote saying we were happy with a rolling 30-day periodic tenancy. They didn't respond.

ognum

Pixie5740 wrote: »

A Section 21 does not end a tenancy. It is merely notice that a landlord might got to court to get an eviction notice (all explained in G_M's link). Unless you were willing to call the landlord's bluff you have no way of knowing whether the landlord would have gone as far as applying for an eviction notice.

It would be uneconomical for a landlord to pay the letting agent to take you to court and pay the letting agent another tenant renewal fee. It would be far more economical to allow a paying tenant remain on a periodic tenancy.

You obviously weren't feeling lucky...punk.

Sometimes it is not about the economics. I currently have a tenant who pays her rent on time each month and has been my tenant for over four years.

In the last year she has repeatedly not replied to emails and letters asking for access to repair a leak into the flat below, the owner below is understandably annoyed.

I have issued an S21, she has always paid rent but the flat will rent again easily, I may have a small loss from lack of rent but at least I won't have to deal with her!