Discovered house is holiday let only

MartinMI

What are my rights, I have discovered current rented property does not having planning permission for permanent residency, only holiday let - planning have confirmed this and landlord is now applying for permanent application but with no guarantees - I want to leave and find somewhere else but estate agent is saying I cannot leave until end of tenancy agreement, which I argue is invalid given landlord knowingly signed saying it was valid for let but in fact it isn't - however I seem to be unable to get deposit back and am being threatened with court if I leave, dont know where to turn next...

davidmcn

Can't see why the tenancy agreement would be invalid. You'd have a case if you had to leave early because planning were taking enforcement action, but for the meantime what's the problem?

MartinMI

the holiday let only allows 90 days occupancy so effectively the tenancy agreement is not valid

Caz3121

MartinMI wrote: »

the holiday let only allows 90 days occupancy so effectively the tenancy agreement is not valid

have you been there more than 90 days?

Bob_Bank_Spanker_2

Why is the tenancy agreement not valid?

davidmcn

MartinMI wrote: »

the holiday let only allows 90 days occupancy so effectively the tenancy agreement is not valid

What holiday let? Do you mean the planning condition?

MartinMI

Yes so the landlord only has permission to let the property as a holiday property, not a permanent residency, I have been here 13 months - planning enforcement have confirmed in writing as of today it is not legal for me to live here but the landlord is now applying retrospectively (with no guarantee of receiving ) so no eviction order is being issued.

davidmcn

MartinMI wrote: »

Yes so the landlord only has permission to let the property as a holiday property, not a permanent residency, I have been here 13 months - planning enforcement have confirmed in writing as of today it is not legal for me to live here but the landlord is now applying retrospectively (with no guarantee of receiving ) so no eviction order is being issued.

You have a valid contract with the landlord, even if there is a breach of planning. Worry about it if and when you get asked to leave before the end of your tenancy. For the meantime the planners have to allow your landlord's application (and any appeal) to run its course.

MartinMI

how is the contract valid when the contract is based on the property being leasable, current planning conditions state otherwise, the landlord signed an agreement that the property was leasable as a permanent residence knowingly misleading the estate agents and by extension me?

Bob_Bank_Spanker_2

MartinMI wrote: »

how is the contract valid when the contract is based on the property being leasable, current planning conditions state otherwise, the landlord signed an agreement that the property was leasable as a permanent residence knowingly misleading the estate agents and by extension me?

People do things they aren't allowed to all the time. Take sub-letting. There are countless examples where people sub-let, against the terms of their contract. The "real" LL finds out - but there is little they can do, as a valid contract is in place between the sub tenant and the middle man.

Sure, the example is not the same, but as davidmcn says, you have a valid tenancy agreement with your LL until such time as a legal authority (upon instruction by the planning department) tell you otherwise.

Pixie5740

You've been there for 13 months. When did you last sign a tenancy agreement and how long is it for, 6 months, 12 months?