My friend's tenancy problem

ThePants999

Personally I think the friend has a case here. The landlady set up a new tenancy with another tenant after the friend moved out. That was incredibly naughty of her if she still considered the friend's tenancy to be in existence, so if I were a judge I'd take that as an extremely strong indication that the landlady intended to agree a mutual surrender with the friend.

Is it worth going to court over and risking losing, though?

Comms69

ThePants999 wrote: »

Personally I think the friend has a case here. The landlady set up a new tenancy with another tenant after the friend moved out. That was incredibly naughty of her if she still considered the friend's tenancy to be in existence, so if I were a judge I'd take that as an extremely strong indication that the landlady intended to agree a mutual surrender with the friend.

Is it worth going to court over and risking losing, though?

the landlady clearly did intend it to mutual surrender- it’s the terms that are in question

PersianCatLady

greyville wrote: »

My friend interpreted the wording of the landlady's email to mean 'if you leave three weeks early, pay me four weeks and I'll refund you three weeks'.

The wording of the letter suggests the landlady would refund my friend, but could it be that she's just been very clever with the wording?

The LL suggested nothing of the sort, your friend just wasn't very clever with her reading.

PersianCatLady

greyville wrote: »

Let me simplify:

August 7 - day tenancy was due to end
July 18 - day she moved out.
August 7 - day rent was paid up to
There are 20 days between July 18 and August 7. My friend feels she's due a rent refund for those days.

Your friend can feel what she likes but the original e-mail clearly states that she had to pay up until 7th August. End of story.

Next time perhaps your friend should confirm "her feelings" in writing so that there is no confusion further down the line???