Revenge Eviction

Guest101

G_M wrote: »

Both the links in my post above indicate the law applies to renewals. ie any new fixed term agreement.

I'll take a look, I (possibly now wrongly) remember reading that the deregulation act would come into force for tenancies which started prior to Oct 2015 in 2018.


but good news

G_M

Guest101 wrote: »

I'll take a look, I (possibly now wrongly) remember reading that the deregulation act would come into force for tenancies which started prior to Oct 2015 in 2018.


but good news

Yes but but by signing a new fixed term, perhaps with new terms/rent etc, a 'new tenancy' commences. So if this happens post Oct 2015....

The suggestion about a periodic tenancy commencing post Oct 2015 leaves me baffled since, yes, that s a 'new tenancy', so I'm suprised both the authorites I googled (see links above) say they are excluded.

I have been unable to find a source document since the Act itself does not seem to specify.

mrkjd

An update. We informed the landlord that the S21 was flawed and we would not be acting on it to which their reply has been silence and it has now expired. I note that our Tenancy Agreement states " Landlord may give written Notice to the Tenant that the landlord intends to seek possession ...." and "If the Tenant does not comply with that Notice the Landlord will bring this Agreement to an end and re-gain possession of the Property by complying with his statutory obligations"

This seems to imply the Tenancy Agreement is no longer valid which is interesting. Is this the case? Can we demand a new agreement? Does this mean (for example) we can move out without giving the full notice? We would give 28 days but prefer not to be confined to the "one full rental period" clause which would be difficult to align with our eventual move.

Guest101

mrkjd wrote: »

An update. We informed the landlord that the S21 was flawed and we would not be acting on it to which their reply has been silence and it has now expired. I note that our Tenancy Agreement states " Landlord may give written Notice to the Tenant that the landlord intends to seek possession ...." and "If the Tenant does not comply with that Notice the Landlord will bring this Agreement to an end and re-gain possession of the Property by complying with his statutory obligations"

This seems to imply the Tenancy Agreement is no longer valid which is interesting. Is this the case? Can we demand a new agreement? Does this mean (for example) we can move out without giving the full notice? We would give 28 days but prefer not to be confined to the "one full rental period" clause which would be difficult to align with our eventual move.

No it does not mean that.

AdrianC

mrkjd wrote: »

An update. We informed the landlord that the S21 was flawed and we would not be acting on it to which their reply has been silence and it has now expired. I note that our Tenancy Agreement states " Landlord may give written Notice to the Tenant that the landlord intends to seek possession ...." and "If the Tenant does not comply with that Notice the Landlord will bring this Agreement to an end and re-gain possession of the Property by complying with his statutory obligations"

This seems to imply the Tenancy Agreement is no longer valid which is interesting. Is this the case? Can we demand a new agreement? Does this mean (for example) we can move out without giving the full notice? We would give 28 days but prefer not to be confined to the "one full rental period" clause which would be difficult to align with our eventual move.

You seem to want it both ways.

Either he gave notice, or he didn't. If his s21 was invalid, then he did not give notice.

If you want to move out forthwith, then why were you complaining about the s21?

Pixie5740

Yes your tenancy agreement is still valid. Your tenancy can only be ended by you or a court and since neither you nor a court has given notice the tenancy continues.

I'm not sure where you're getting that you need to give 28 days notice from. If you pay your rent monthly then your notice would be 1 tenancy period i.e. a month aligning with your tenancy start date.

See Ending/Renewing an AST for further information.

mrkjd

AdrianC wrote: »

You seem to want it both ways.

Either he gave notice, or he didn't. If his s21 was invalid, then he did not give notice.

If you want to move out forthwith, then why were you complaining about the s21?

. Are you a Landlord - you seem miffed that I am scrutinising the TA and S21 validity? Why shouldn't a tenant complain about a S21 even if they are going to move out anyway? I am simply trying to understand the position to assess options moving forward.

I would say it is the landlord who seems to want it both ways in deciding whether the agreement ends or remains when according to the TA the agreement WILL end without mentioning whether the notice was valid or not. I fully understand that the intended meaning probably assumes a "valid" notice but we are dealing with a legal contract here so who is to say whether this isn't deliberate wording or simply poor draftsmanship? Sensu stricto it seems unambiguous that the agreement has to be ended by the landlord. That may be advantageous to a landlord or tenant depending on underlying factors.

I disagree that just because the notice was not valid it automatically means he did not give notice. He gave notice but it was invalid. Or, if you prefer, he did not give valid notice. If a policeman gives you a speeding ticket which then proves invalid it does not follow that he did not give you a ticket!

I have since leant that the Prevention of Eviction Act 1977 Section 5 requires a full rental term notice so I can't expect less as the TA term is also this. Fair 'Nuff.

Guest101

mrkjd wrote: »

. Are you a Landlord - you seem miffed that I am scrutinising the TA and S21 validity? Why shouldn't a tenant complain about a S21 even if they are going to move out anyway? I am simply trying to understand the position to assess options moving forward. - Sure but if you're moving out the s.21 will never be 'activated' So it's irrelevant

I would say it is the landlord who seems to want it both ways in deciding whether the agreement ends or remains when according to the TA the agreement WILL end without mentioning whether the notice was valid or not. I fully understand that the intended meaning probably assumes a "valid" notice but we are dealing with a legal contract here so who is to say whether this isn't deliberate wording or simply poor draftsmanship? - The law. Sensu stricto it seems unambiguous that the agreement has to be ended by the landlord. That may be advantageous to a landlord or tenant depending on underlying factors. - The law overrides any contract clauses

I disagree that just because the notice was not valid it automatically means he did not give notice. He gave notice but it was invalid. - He did not give valid notice, so it's not relevant. You are wrong, sorry Or, if you prefer, he did not give valid notice. If a policeman gives you a speeding ticket which then proves invalid it does not follow that he did not give you a ticket! - It does, it's like the event never happens, legally.

I have since leant that the Prevention of Eviction Act 1977 Section 5 requires a full rental term notice so I can't expect less as the TA term is also this. Fair 'Nuff.

If you're moving out then it's all academic anyway

AdrianC

mrkjd wrote: »

Why shouldn't a tenant complain about a S21 even if they are going to move out anyway?

If you're going to move out anyway, then the s21 notice is utterly irrelevant - not least because it's twice as long as the notice that you give.

I disagree that just because the notice was not valid it automatically means he did not give notice. He gave notice but it was invalid. Or, if you prefer, he did not give valid notice.

The effect of all three is the same. The landlord is not ending your tenancy. Even if he does, that's two months from the start of the next rental period after the s21 is received before the landlord can start the lengthy procedure to regain possession.

Meanwhile, you want him to play by the letter of the law, while simultaneously wanting to ignore it where it doesn't fit your own intentions - because you don't want your OWN notice to have to conform to the start of a rental period.

THAT's what I mean by having your cake and eating it. Or, to look at it another way, hypocrisy.

mrkjd

AdrianC wrote: »

If you're going to move out anyway, then the s21 notice is utterly irrelevant - not least because it's twice as long as the notice that you give.



The effect of all three is the same. The landlord is not ending your tenancy. Even if he does, that's two months from the start of the next rental period after the s21 is received before the landlord can start the lengthy procedure to regain possession.

Meanwhile, you want him to play by the letter of the law, while simultaneously wanting to ignore it where it doesn't fit your own intentions - because you don't want your OWN notice to have to conform to the start of a rental period.

THAT's what I mean by having your cake and eating it. Or, to look at it another way, hypocrisy.

Absolutely not intending to ignore the law. That's why I'm on here looking into legitimate options