Why was I given a section 21 when i signed my lease?

silvercar

You have a standard 12 month AST, so you have the right to live there until the end date. If the landlord then wanted his property back (which would be reasonable as your contract only gives you the right to stay there until that date), he would have to jump through some legal hoops in order to regain his property.

The first of these hoops would be serving this S21 notice. The law allows this first hoop to be served anytime after the contract has started. So some landlords, and even more letting agents, serve the notice to all tenants soon after the start of the tenancy. This is just his standard procedure and doesn't mean that the landlord would be unwilling to extend the tenancy. It is just the landlord covering himself with an unknown tenant.

If you both agree to extend the tenancy, this notice does not prevent this. If you want to leave at the end, you can. If you turn out to be a problem tenant (rent arrears, disturbances etc) than the landlord has covered himself in terms of regaining his property at the end of the tenancy.

Debt_Free_Chick

silvercar wrote: »

If you turn out to be a problem tenant (rent arrears, disturbances etc) than the landlord has covered himself in terms of regaining his property at the end of the tenancy.

Although you don't need to be a problem tenant ..... the LL needs "no valid reason" to serve the Notice.

Can you clarify .... if nothing else happens .... the s21 notice has been served at outset so in the absence of a new agreement, when must the tenant vacate the property?

BobProperty

Debt_Free_Chick wrote: »

Can you clarify .... if nothing else happens .... the s21 notice has been served at outset so in the absence of a new agreement, when must the tenant vacate the property?

They don't. This is why the whole S21 argument comes about.

Debt_Free_Chick

BobProperty wrote: »

They don't. This is why the whole S21 argument comes about.

I'm gonna have to bow out and so some research as I'm clearly not understanding this. Genuine thanks though - you've just made me realise that I don't understand the position, so I need to refrain from commenting until I do

franklee

BobProperty wrote: »

They don't. This is why the whole S21 argument comes about.

That's another side affect of the Sword of Damocles (the nickname for this precautionary serving of Section 21 notices even when the landlord hasn't yet decided he wants possession) it trains tenants to ignore Section 21 notices as they are thrown about like confetti and the tenant gets used to them not being actioned. This makes life harder for the genuine landlords who have served the S21 fairly and actually want their property back!

Debt_Free_Chick wrote: »

I'm gonna have to bow out and so some research as I'm clearly not understanding this. Genuine thanks though - you've just made me realise that I don't understand the position, so I need to refrain from commenting until I do

I think you understand fine, it's just that landlords will tell tenants to leave when the S21 notice expires if it suits them and tell them it's "just routine" when it doesn't. This view changes depending on if they want the tenant to leave or not!

But if you'd like a recap, the usual course of events if both landlord and tenant are playing nicely is:

1. Landlord decides he wants the tenant to leave and serves a Section 21 notice requiring possession with a minimum of two months notice.

2. Tenant uses this notice period to find somewhere else to live, pack up his worldly goods and arrange moving.

3. On expiry of the notice the tenant leaves and the landlord gets his property back.

If the tenant refuses to leave then we have:

1. Landlord decides he wants the tenant to leave and serves a Section 21 notice requiring possession with a minimum of two months notice.

2. On expiry of the notice the tenant is still in occupation. At this point the landlord applies to court for accelerated possession, this does not need a hearing.

3. If the S21 is valid the court awards possession. The tenant can leave at any point during this process. If the tenant has still refused to leave by the date the posession order states the landlord goes back to court to appoint bailiffs.

4. Bailiffs arrive to remove the tenant by force.

The length of time between stages 2-4 depends on how busy the courts are, it could be weeks or even worst case months.

Finally here's the Sword of Damocles version:

1. Landlord serves a Section 21 notice requiring possession near the start of the tenancy. At this time the landlord doesn't intend the tenant should leave.

2. Tenant thinks the 21 notice isn't meant as it's "just routine". He does not use the notice period to arrange moving.

3. At any time, possibly only days before the S21 notice is due to expire, the landlord decides he wants possession and tells the tenant to leave on expiry of the notice. The tenant has to arrange moving in a hurry or face possession proceedings starting from point 2. above. Alternatively if the S21 notice has already expired and the tenant remained on a periodic tenancy the landlord can ask the tenant to leave immediately or or face possession proceedings starting from point 2. above.

So what is the downside to the tenant of staying past S21 expiry and facing possession proceedings?

1. It's pretty stressful.

2. As the loser the tenant will have to pay the landlord's court fee, typically 150 pounds, and costs of bailiffs etc.

3. Once the tenant has this on his references he will find it hard to rent privately from a reputable landlord/agent again. If the tenant is going to buy then that does not matter. If the tenant is moving into council accommodation then it doesn't matter as the council will have probably have told the tenant to stay put till the end anyway.

Other effects of the Sword of Damocles:

1. If the tenant hasn't agreed (in writing) that he can stay in time to arrange moving should negotiations fail then he will have little alternative but to stay and accept bad terms such as a rent rise or agency renewal fees. It is always best to negotiate from a position of strength which means having an alternative available.

2. It trains tenants to ignore section 21 notices.

3. The landlord may have a tenant leave unexpectedly and so have an empty property.

4. If the landlord is not contactable (as in littlesaint's case whose landlord was abroad and the agency could not get hold of them) then the tenant will not know if they are required to move or not.

5. If the landlord/agent give the tenant any reassurances they can ignore the S21 then the S21 is technically invalid but not many tenants realise that.

I hope that helps!

Cerisue_2

IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOU WILL BE EVICTED in Feb 2008. The notice has been used in order for the L/L to start legal proceedings for a possession order and if necessary an eviction warrant once the fixed term of your tenancy has expired. The L/L cannot start any legal proceedings during the fixed term. I would advise to have the notice checked for legal validity, as if it's legally invalid it cannot be used in Court. To have the notice checked and for further legal advice please go to www.shelter.org.uk

guppy

The S.21 notice may also be invalid if it was served before the day the tenancy started. I.e. if you signed all the documents a few days before the date you were entitled to move in.

I wouldn't really worry yet. If the LL hadn't served the notice he can't treat the tenancy as having ended at the end of the six months, where as you are free to walk.

If you want to stay longer just clarify the LL's intentions nearer the time.

franklee

guppy wrote: »

The S.21 notice may also be invalid if it was served before the day the tenancy started. I.e. if you signed all the documents a few days before the date you were entitled to move in.

It definitely will be invalid if served before the tenancy has actually started.

guppy wrote: »

I wouldn't really worry yet. If the LL hadn't served the notice he can't treat the tenancy as having ended at the end of the six months, where as you are free to walk.

If you want to stay longer just clarify the LL's intentions nearer the time.

Easy enough to say from the comfort of your own armchair but it gets wearing on a tenant having to go through the will-I-be-asked-to-leave-or-is-this-S21-yet-another-blank? every 6-12 months.

It's hardly an incentive for a tenant to settle in. I mean is it even worth unpacking when faced with a 6 month AST and a S21 notice requiring possession at the end of the six months? I don't think I'd bother, especially nowadays with all this talk of BTLers selling up to take their gains before house prices slide.

Neither will I say past S21 expiry, unless there is a dire emergency, I will not let such a thing blot my references. I prefer to deal with reputable agents/landlords!

twirlie

franklee wrote: »

It definitely will be invalid if served before the tenancy has actually started.

Thats interesting, since mine definately was (signed on the 22nd Feb, not the 23rd when the tenancy started). However I have no way to prove this, as we all dated it from the 23rd, as I was mistakenly led to believe that this was how things are done, by the now looking dodgier by the second agent!!

I called the Landlord today, funnily enough - about a sofa which has been cluttering up my spare room (supposed to be my little boys room) since the tenancy started. I asked him about the S21, and asked if he was intending to 'kick me out' on the 23rd Feb. He's a pretty nice guy, so this was a joke on my part. His response suprised me - "Well I was planning on kicking you out a few months ago (I laughed, thinking he was joking - but then realised he was serious) because I'm having a few family problems and was thinking of living there myself, but thats okay now so I guess you can stay."

I'm sorry but I'm really not comfortable with this guy at all now. What on earth makes him think he can 'kick me out' as and when he feels like it?! I know he can't, legally, but this is the first flat I've ever rented, I really need good references (which I should damn well get, considering how well I've looked after his flat) and its hard enough finding a flat on HB as it is - I don't need anything else going against me.

So anyway, the upshot of this is I'm planning to give him my notice in December and move out on Feb 23rd. I have a 1 year old little boy and I'm not happy with a landlord who can completely ignore any promises he's made (see my other threads) and seems to think that he can kick me out as and when he feels like it. I'm also a little concerned about getting my deposit back from him since he seems to have a lot of cash flow problems, and £850 is a lot to lose.

So thats where I stand. Anyone here a landlord in Croydon who's willing to rent to a really nice responsible single mum with 1 year old little boy on HB?!?!

However, my next question is this - if this S21 has already been served, how do I go about giving him my notice?

Thanks guys for your advice. This thread is quite educational for a renting newbie like me!

guppy

franklee wrote: »

Easy enough to say from the comfort of your own armchair but it gets wearing on a tenant having to go through the will-I-be-asked-to-leave-or-is-this-S21-yet-another-blank? every 6-12 months.

I realise this, and I agree with the sentiments in your sig, franklee, but in reality, what else can a tenant do but negotiate with the LL once they've signed up for six months?

Even if the LL doesn't serve the S.21 straight away, the tenant could still be left wondering if they have to move out, right up until the end of month 4 of the tenancy.