What type of contract do I have?

Valandil3

mrginge wrote: »

It does not say you can.

The document is guidance. Not law.

The matter is subjective based on what is reasonable.

Please find some actual case law where a tenant was permitted to assign a tenancy after the LL had unreasonably withheld consent. We can then discuss it further in relation to your position.
Alternatively, find a replacement, seek the LLs permission, if you believe they unreasonably withhold permission then simply inform the LL of this, move out and pay no more rent.

Your defence may possibly then be tested in court.

A much better answer, thank you. I am not a lawyer so it's good to have this stuff explained.

I've lived there since October 2014, not that long. No I don't think I do have an assured tenancy but wanted to check, thanks

mrginge

Valandil3 wrote: »

A much better answer, thank you. I am not a lawyer so it's good to have this stuff explained.

I've lived there since October 2014, not that long. No I don't think I do have an assured tenancy but wanted to check, thanks

guest101 is just trying to point out that you will be unlikely to have an Assured Tenancy (AT), which is very different to an Assured Shorthold Tenancy (AST).

Based on your tenancy start date your original question should have asked if you are a lodger or have an AST.

Penelope_Penguin

mrginge wrote: »

guest101 is just trying to point out that you will be unlikely to have an Assured Tenancy (AT), which is very different to an Assured Statutory Tenancy (AST).

Based on your tenancy start date your original question should have asked if you are a lodger or have an AST.

Just to be accurate - AST - Assured Shorthold Tenancy

Valandil3

Oh right ok, I don't know what the difference is between those anyway! Googling "Assured Statutory Tenancy" doesn't bring up many results

Edit: Oh Penelope has addressed this already, thanks

ThePants999

Valandil3 wrote: »

Seems to me like they should have to have break clauses in them, I wouldn't mind paying a reasonable penalty to cover her costs/inconvenience.

Such as, say... two months' rent? ;-)

Penelope_Penguin

Valandil3 wrote: »

Oh right ok, I don't know what the difference is between those anyway! Googling "Assured Statutory Tenancy" doesn't bring up many results

That's possibly because there's no such thing

G_M

Valandil3 wrote: »

Oh right ok, I don't know what the difference is between those anyway! Googling "Assured Statutory Tenancy" doesn't bring up many results

Edit: Oh Penelope has addressed this already, thanks

Read carefully before googling!

Just to be accurate - AST - Assured Shorthold Tenancy

AT = Assured Tenancy
AST = Assured Shorthold Tenancy
SPT = Statutory Periodic Tenancy

these are all different.

As Mr G says above, the OFT document lays out their opinion of what is fair. It is not the same as a Statute, which lays out the law.

And even if a court decided to enforce the OFT opinions, you'd still have to
a) find a replacement
b) offer them to the LL
c) wait for the LL to credit check/vet them in the usual way (at whose cost...?)

If the LL declined them, you'd then have a potential legal battle on your hands which frankly would not be owrth it for the sake of 2 months rent even if you were certain of winning.

And bear in mind that if the LL did accept the replacement tenant for the remaining 2 months (or you imposed that sub-tenant on the LL) your tenancy would not have ended - you would still be the LL's tenant with all the associated obligations:

* you would not receive your deposit back till the tenancy ended (hopefully 2 months later)
* if your sub-tenant caused damage, you would be liable to the LL (though you could sue your sub-tenant or claim off his deposit)
* if your sub-tenant failed to pay his rent to you, you would still have to pay your rent to the LL
* you would have to declare the rent you received from your sub tenant to HMRC as income
* you would have some 238 other legal obligations as a landlord - as far as your sub-tenant, and the law, is concerned, you would be his landlord.

Do you really want all that for the sake of 2 months.......?

Valandil3

ThePants999 wrote: »

Such as, say... two months' rent? ;-)

Ha, I'm not sure £1500 would be reasonable

Valandil3

G_M wrote: »

Read carefully before googling!

I did, not my fault they said the wrong thing! The post has been edited

mrginge

Valandil3 wrote: »

I did, not my fault they said the wrong thing! The post has been edited

It's been a long week