Landlord wants to evict me and move back in!

Ozzuk

I would guess the LL thought she could use the 'moving back home' clause and doesn't realise it doesn't apply. You'll likely find they push back until they get legal advice and realise their error.

Rather than drag it out I'd point out their error, suggest they take legal advice, and also say you'd be willing to discuss a buyout (if you are).

MrNiceGuy_007

Guest101 wrote: »

Post your response here first

oops.. I already sent it.

"I understand your situation, however we have signed a fixed contract of 12 months. We would have not taken the tenancy if anything less was offered, as stability is important to us. Actually we were thinking of extending another year as we are looking to purchase the next house.

I am a little confused about what rights you are referring too, as this a fixed contract of 12 months with no break clauses. Section 21 can only be used after the fixed term has expired, leaving only section 8.

Of course we will be happy to move out providing compensation is paid, I feel this not unreasonable given the costs we have already paid, and will have to pay again.
# Fees £300
# Moving costs £400
# 3x month rent + return of deposit

Please let know your thoughts."

Guest101

jamesb1983 wrote: »

opps.. I already sent it.

"I understand your situation, however we have signed a fixed contract of 12 months. We would have not taken the tenancy if anything less was offered, as stability is important to us. Actually we were thinking of extending another year as we are looking to purchase the next house.

I am a little confused about what rights you are referring too, as this a fixed contract of 12 months with no break clauses. Section 21 can only be used after the fixed term has expired, leaving only section 8.

Of course we will be happy to move out providing compensation is paid, I feel this not unreasonable given the costs we have already paid, and will have to pay again.
# Fees £300
# Moving costs £400
# 3x month rent + return of deposit

Please let know your thoughts."

Yes basically fine. I'd usually le them do their own homework, the only thing is you didn't set a date, so we'd be happy to move out by X, provided that you pay


don't worry too much, this is just negotiation stage.

AnotherJoe

I'd have bumped up all those numbers a bit to allow them to negotiate you back down to the ones you posted. Maybe you'll have to play hardball to get those now.

Guest101

AnotherJoe wrote: »

I'd have bumped up all those numbers a bit to allow them to negotiate you back down to the ones you posted. Maybe you'll have to play hardball to get those now.

Well the alternative is ofcourse the OP doesn't move and the LL is forced to rent somewhere.


Which is the default position for the tenant, so should be able to stick to their guns.

fairy_lights

Brace yourself for the reply, I'd put money on it going something like this:
"I'm afraid you are wrong because *Insert made up legal argument*.
We have tried to be sympathetic to your situations but now *half hearted threat*
Sob story, sob story,
Kind regards"

Guest101

fairy_lights wrote: »

Brace yourself for the reply, I'd put money on it going something like this:
"I'm afraid you are wrong because *Insert made up legal argument*.
We have tried to be sympathetic to your situations but now *half hearted threat*
Sob story, sob story,
Kind regards"

Yep, standard procedure.


The reply, as always is:


"Thanks for your email, look forward to hearing from you legal representatives."

hazyjo

Guest101 wrote: »

Yep, standard procedure.


The reply, as always is:


"Thanks for your email, look forward to hearing from you legal representatives."

Was just about to say the same. I'd probably add 'I have taken legal advice in this regard, I suggest you do the same. I look forward to hearing from you or your solicitor.'


Jx

Miss_Samantha

You don't have to reply to everything.

tim123456789

deannatrois wrote: »

The LL doesn't know what he's doing, the clause re grounds 1 is very vague and I suspecty will be viewed as an unfair term.

Of course Ground 1 can't be an unfair term - it's a statutory right.


Provided that it's exercised correctly, of course, which it probably hasn't been here