Illegal chances to tenancy contract?

drD

Hi. I'm renewing my contract as a private tenant with my landlord who is represented by my estate agent throughout (including for the signing of the contract on their behalf).
The estate agent sent me an unsigned contract and asked me to initial each page and sign at the end.

I inserted some clauses under the estate agent/landlord duties.
1) One was something they have already been doing since moving in (providing a monthly cleaner) but wasn't stipulated in the contract.
2) Another was in response to their slowness this year with acting on some maintenance. One shower was out of action for months. Another time our kitchen sink took ten days to get fixed while stagnant water stood there and stopped 6 tenants from doing any washing up and therefore cooking in the kitchen. The clause uses standard legal wording stating that the landlord has to action maintenance issues upon notification within reasonable time, except for domestic emergencies (all showers not working, all toilets not working, fridges or freezers breaking down, kitchen sink being broken, etc), where they should start maintenance work within 72 hours of being notified (after we have performed reasonable tenant behaviour to fix it ourselves).

They have returned the contract signed. I don't know if they read the changes before signing.

Legally I think this is acceptable, as they have a duty just like me to read the contract before signing.

Or is what I have done illegal?

Slithery

What could be 'illegal' about this?


The clauses that you've added may be unenforcable depending on how they were drafted and their contents but this doesn't make them illegal.

Pixie5740

Your estage agent?

drD

What would make them unenforcable?
I used standard legal wording from examples from other contracts

buggy_boy

Dont see anything wrong with this but I think the point others are trying to make is you say you have added providing a monthly cleaner. If the landlord drops round some cheap cleaning fluid once a month then legally they have met their obligations as it is not specific that it should be a monthly cleaning service by a professional cleaning service company for X number of hours.

You also added they must fix in a reasonable time, that is subjective and as you wrote the amendment to the contract it is not up to you to decide what is reasonable, to be enforceable you would have to prove what is reasonable which could be complicated. You also add repairs should start within 72hrs, the landlord could claim he has phoned a contractor and is waiting for them to get back to them, legally it could be argued he has started the process of the repair.

Anyway you kind of get the point but I often do this, when things say "you have read and understood" I often put a line through "and understood".

G_M

drD wrote: »

....
Or is what I have done illegal?

Yes. Now off to prison with you!

(Of course it's not illegal....)

....my landlord who is represented by my estate agent....

a) he's a letting agent, not an estate agent, and b) he's the landlord's letting agent!

I used standard legal wording from examples from other contracts

Just because they are in other contracts does not make them enforceable. We see regular examples on this forum of unenforceble clauses.

the landlord has to action maintenance issues upon notification within reasonable time, except for domestic emergencies (all showers not working, all toilets not working, fridges or freezers breaking down, kitchen sink being broken, etc), where they should start maintenance work within 72 hours of being notified

Well the first part is pointless as it adds nothing to your existing rights as a tenant.

And the 72 hour time-frame is pointless (well, legally - it may have some practical use as a pount of reference). If there were a reasonable explanation for a delay beyond that, then a court would accept that, If there were no reasonable explanation, then your existing rights would already require an emergency repair.

But certainly you can add anything you like to a contract.

ciderboy2009

Did you actually notify the letting agent that you had made changes?

Were they typed into the contract or hand written?

G_M

ciderboy2009 wrote: »

Did you actually notify the letting agent that you had made changes?

Were they typed into the contract or hand written?

My understanding was:
* no - he did not notify and
* hand-written.


But neither of those facts makes a difference unless the LL claims the hand-written additions were added after signiture.


Presumably the LL kept a copy before returning the signed one to the OP, and presumably that copy would have the same additions.

steampowered

Is the landlord's signature on a version of the contract with your amendments? If so, that sounds legally binding to me.

Or is the landlord's signature on the original version of the contract? If so, you have both signed a different contract, in this scenario I doubt the new clauses would be legally binding.

LadyDee

Yes! You're sick!

drD wrote: »

What would make them unenforcable?
I used standard legal wording from examples from other contracts

If they were added below the agent's signature, it could be said that those clauses were added after he signed.

drD

They were typed in using Adobe.
They were before the landlord's signature, as per my original post.

The landlord sent me a copy of the mutually signed contract later and it contains my changes.