Letting agency asking me to pay for a vacated property after notice period.

Lord_Skytower

Hi there, I wonder if someone can offer some solid advice on this slightly complicated matter...

I am a tenant in a rented apartment through an agency at present. In January, I was informed by the agency that the landlord wished to put the property on the market due to a change in circumstance. Naturally, this didn't mean I had to move out immediately or was given any specific notice, but felt that I may as well start looking straight away.

On January 25th, another one of the apartments in the same block appeared on the market, with a date of vacancy of February 25th. I enquired about it and, basically, had first refusal - so paid my £90 admin fee for the references to be done. The only potential snag was that the "anniversary" date where I currently reside was also the 25th of the month (on a rolling monthly basis), so therefore I wouldn't be able to give my month's notice until I had received confirmation back that all references were satisfactory.

In the interim, I spoke to my current agency and sounded them out on accepting a notice period that would involve part of a month (and therefore part payment). They suggested that in some cases, the landlord may object to this, but generally it is accepted provided I gave them the relevant notice period. Upon approval of the flat I viewed, I then gave notice on my current flat to end on March 7th, and a move in date for the new flat of March 6th.

Subsequently, my current agency sent me an e-mail with details of what I would need to pay for the part month of tenancy, i.e. 11 days. All was going swimmingly up until Monday of this week, when I received an e-mail which began as follows:

I have just had an email from the landlord saying that she has taken further advice and she now wants to hold you to a technical months notice. This means that whilst you can still move out as you have planned, financially she is going to want the balance of the rest of the months rent paid to make up the rent until 25th March.

I will contact you tomorrow once I have spoken with her further and will see what I can do but if she is adamant then unfortunately it means you will need to pay the additional amount or release this amount from your deposit.

This, basically, is an extra £420 they are wanting, for a flat that I will not be living in, for a period of 19 days. This seems totally out of order, unacceptable, and unethical. Their meagre advice was to contact my new agency and see if I can put back the moving in date with them - which I would imagine is impossible, as all agreements are in place and signed to move in next Monday.

Apologies for the lengthy post, but hopefully the full detail will assist anyone who has some helpful advice on what to do or can be done.

Many thanks in advance.

Fosterdog

unfortunately for you, you had a contract, albeit a rolling one. It is not fair on the landlord for you to expect to move out early and only pay for the days you spent there as they can't just move a new tenant in with just a few days notice. They will need to check over the property, possibly do some maintenance and decorative work, find new tenants etc. Why should they be out of pocket due to you leaving early? Same goes for if they want to sell, they would have budgeted based on you living there and paying rent up to a set date each month so even without needing a new tenant they need fair notice of your intention to leave.

It's no different to a phone contract in that respect, if your minimum term contract is up and your month by month renewal runs to the 25th of each month you can't just cancel on the 7th of the month and not pay the rest they generally have a minimum of one months notice. Same for gym memberships and most other month by month rolling contracts.

I think there may have been some crossed wires with them saying just part of a term would need paying if the landlord accepts, generally landlords will allow you to give one full months notice (so you would have had to give notice prior to 25th Jan) and then after the one full month most will let you stay on a week by week or even day by day pro rata basis if you need a little bit of extra time to move but not a full month. This is only after a full month though and not something they have to allow.

The only bit out of order, unacceptable and unethical is the way you are treating the landlord in this situation.

itchyfeet123

Since you have an email from the agent spelling out your costs for 11 days, and the second email is worded about the LL getting further advice, you could try to make an argument that they (either agent or LL) had agreed to the early end data and pro-rated rent and that they don't have the right to change their mind after the fact. Whether this would get you anywhere if they pursued you for the money through formal channels is another matter, but they might decide it's not worth their while to pursue you if you stand your ground.

Fosterdog

Lord_Skytower wrote: »

In the interim, I spoke to my current agency and sounded them out on accepting a notice period that would involve part of a month (and therefore part payment). They suggested that in some cases, the landlord may object to this, but generally it is accepted provided I gave them the relevant notice period. Upon approval of the flat I viewed, I then gave notice on my current flat to end on March 7th, and a move in date for the new flat of March 6th.

Subsequently, my current agency sent me an e-mail with details of what I would need to pay for the part month of tenancy, i.e. 11 days. All was going swimmingly up until Monday of this week, when I received an e-mail which began as follows:

itchyfeet123 wrote: »

Since you have an email from the agent spelling out your costs for 11 days, and the second email is worded about the LL getting further advice, you could try to make an argument that they (either agent or LL) had agreed to the early end data and pro-rated rent and that they don't have the right to change their mind after the fact. Whether this would get you anywhere if they pursued you for the money through formal channels is another matter, but they might decide it's not worth their while to pursue you if you stand your ground.

I think there is a bit of a misunderstanding there, it looks like the original agency for the original flat has said basically what I said above in that the landlord "may" allow part of a month but only if the relevant notice is given, so a full month notice and rent given and then pro rata for any extra days outside the month notice.

It is the new agency in the new flat who are allowing the tenancy to start on the 25th of the month but allowing op to move in early or late depending how you look at it and pay rent on a pro rata basis. They are the ones who calculated the 11 days and agreed to it not the original agency or landlord.

saajan_12

Out of interest, when did you give the LL/LA a final date (ie. how much 'notice' did they have? Usually in a SPT the tenant's notice has to align with tenancy periods.

HOWEVER if the LL (perhaps through Their agent) agreed to a mutual surrender of the tenancy on a certain date, with certain terms (rent pro rata'd, vacate by a certain date, any extra fees, what happens with deposit etc) then that is a new agreement which has to be abided by.

- Did the LA agree on behalf of the LL (or was it always "we'll check with the LL but should be ok"
- Was there any mention of what would happen with the deposit?
- Is this agreement in writing?

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

All I would say is that if you do pay until the 25th March, then you don't move out until the 25th March. It should make your move easier at any rate.

You might also find that if the landlord realises they are not going to have their cake and eat it (they may be planning to move someone in on the 7th and get paid twice) they might change their position.

It's the "whilst you can still move out as you have planned" bit that makes me slightly suspect something here. I mean, why mention this? Of course you can move out of somewhere while you are still paying.

itchyfeet123

Can't quote because I'm on a phone, but Fosterdog, re relevant notice period, the wording is ambiguous. One interpretation is a period of a full 30 days, even if it doesn't align with the formal notice dates. We don't know when the notice was given.

G_M

Lord_Skytower wrote: »

.....the "anniversary" date where I currently reside was also the 25th of the month (on a rolling monthly basis),
So 25th to 24th?
or 26th to 25th?

In the interim, I spoke to my current agency and sounded them out on accepting a notice period that would involve part of a month (and therefore part payment). They suggested that in some cases, the landlord may object to this, but generally it is accepted provided
So absolutley nothing agreed at this stage.
But perhaps you should quote us their exact words, and whether it was verbal or written.

I gave them the relevant notice period.
Gave who?

I then gave notice on my current flat to end on March 7th,
Exact date you served notice?
To expire on March 7th

So clearly you are not complying with the tenancy notice requirements at this stage
and a move in date for the new flat of March 6th.

Subsequently, my current agency sent me an e-mail with details of what I would need to pay for the part month of tenancy, i.e. 11 days.
Please quote this email, exactly, and in full.

All was going swimmingly up until Monday of this week, when I received an e-mail which began as follows:
(landlord wants proper notice in full)

Validity of this depends entirely on the wording of the earlier email. Quote it in full.

Since you've left out the critical email wording it is impossible to advise.

Lord_Skytower

Fosterdog wrote: »

unfortunately for you, you had a contract, albeit a rolling one. It is not fair on the landlord for you to expect to move out early and only pay for the days you spent there as they can't just move a new tenant in with just a few days notice. They will need to check over the property, possibly do some maintenance and decorative work, find new tenants etc. Why should they be out of pocket due to you leaving early? Same goes for if they want to sell, they would have budgeted based on you living there and paying rent up to a set date each month so even without needing a new tenant they need fair notice of your intention to leave.

It's no different to a phone contract in that respect, if your minimum term contract is up and your month by month renewal runs to the 25th of each month you can't just cancel on the 7th of the month and not pay the rest they generally have a minimum of one months notice. Same for gym memberships and most other month by month rolling contracts.

I think there may have been some crossed wires with them saying just part of a term would need paying if the landlord accepts, generally landlords will allow you to give one full months notice (so you would have had to give notice prior to 25th Jan) and then after the one full month most will let you stay on a week by week or even day by day pro rata basis if you need a little bit of extra time to move but not a full month. This is only after a full month though and not something they have to allow.

The only bit out of order, unacceptable and unethical is the way you are treating the landlord in this situation.

You tone is rather harsh, and perhaps you should re-read my post. The house is being sold - and, in the opinion of people I have spoken to, at too high a price - so there is no-one to move in at present, certainly not a tenant as it is not being rented out any further.

I gave a month's notice, with the agreement of the letting agency and, in turn, the landlord. Note the word: agreement. I CHECKED to make sure that this was okay, and the gist of the response was that it was okay. How is that unacceptable on reflection of ME? I have tried to be fair to all parties in this matter.

Lord_Skytower

itchyfeet123 wrote: »

Since you have an email from the agent spelling out your costs for 11 days, and the second email is worded about the LL getting further advice, you could try to make an argument that they (either agent or LL) had agreed to the early end data and pro-rated rent and that they don't have the right to change their mind after the fact. Whether this would get you anywhere if they pursued you for the money through formal channels is another matter, but they might decide it's not worth their while to pursue you if you stand your ground.

I am not sure whether I *can* stand my ground on this, as they clearly intend taking any monies due from the deposit.

Lord_Skytower

Fosterdog wrote: »

I think there is a bit of a misunderstanding there, it looks like the original agency for the original flat has said basically what I said above in that the landlord "may" allow part of a month but only if the relevant notice is given, so a full month notice and rent given and then pro rata for any extra days outside the month notice.

It is the new agency in the new flat who are allowing the tenancy to start on the 25th of the month but allowing op to move in early or late depending how you look at it and pay rent on a pro rata basis. They are the ones who calculated the 11 days and agreed to it not the original agency or landlord.

Incorrect. The new agency had the flat AVAILABLE from the 25th. I had to wait for references to come back acceptable before I could agree a date with them, and thus give notice on my current abode. Hence why I checked with the current letting agency as to whether they would accept a "part month".