No HMO License - can i end my tenancy early?

Sunzbck

Hi guys,

So i'm going try to make this as simple as possible, the council in the borough i am in have recently confirmed that the property i am living in does not have the correct HMO license and landlord has failed to provide any response to this matter for 2 letters sent to him (2nd being a final letter).

I am taking action to seek a RRO (rent repayment order).

I just wanted to know if i can end my tenancy early because of this? The tenancy agreement is due to end in October 19, however, the property does not feel fit to live in and i would like to leave in 1 month if it's possible. Reasoning below:

- no fire door in my room
- landlord / agents come into the property as they see fit with 0 notice
- notional amounts have been deducted from my deposit without my agreement
- my deposit is not protected, and from what i see online reviews state they do not give back / take months longer than they should.
- there's not license which makes me believe my room is not fit for renting, a dummy wall has been put up in the kitchen across one side and that is my room. - no planning permission to put a wall there either according to register.

I know it's not great i want to end the tenancy early, however i don't feel like i will get my deposit back at all (approx 1k) and i just want out of this situation asap rather than letting it drag to October.

Any advise will be welcomed,

Many thanks,

Sunzbck

Should have mentioned that in the contract it does allow you to leave with a months notice if 1 week's rent is paid, so they can find a replacement, however would obviously prefer to find a way out of the contract other than paying for it... (given i don't even think they will give my full deposit back, i'd rather not give them more £££)

G_M

I'm not familiar with HMOs, but so far as the deposit is concerned, as soon as the tenancy ends (how/whenerver), you write to the LL at the address for serving notices, requesting it's return.

I would also provide a deadline (7 days) failing which you would
a) make a claim via the courts for the deposit and
b) make a claim via the courts for the 3 times deposit penalty for not protecting the deposit.

See

* Deposits: payment, protection and return


Having said that, a quick search and I see that for a valid rent repayment order, the LLmust have committed an offence under the Housing Act - failure to comply with improvement notice or prohibition order. What were the two letters you say the council sent?

G_M

As for whether you can end the tenancy early, again, I'm no HMO expert (plus you've been vague about these two 'letters'), but I suspect contract law applies, and you/the LL have a valid contract.

The fact that the LL is breaching some terms of the contract, or some statutory obligations, does not (I think) negate the entire contract.

However, the contract allows you to give notice at any time, at minimal cost (one weeks rent). Against that, you can claim the deposit penalty (3 times the deposit), plus the rent repayment order, (assuming you succeed), so you'd be quids in.........

saajan_12

Sunzbck wrote: »

Hi guys,

So i'm going try to make this as simple as possible, the council in the borough i am in have recently confirmed that the property i am living in does not have the correct HMO license and landlord has failed to provide any response to this matter for 2 letters sent to him (2nd being a final letter).

I am taking action to seek a RRO (rent repayment order).- do you have proof (criminal standard) that the property (1) doesn't have and (2) needs a HMO licence? These are two separate things. Have you gone to the tribunal?

I just wanted to know if i can end my tenancy early because of this? The tenancy agreement is due to end in October 19, however, the property does not feel fit to live in and i would like to leave in 1 month if it's possible. Reasoning below: - you still have habitable accommodation (ie a roof, running water etc) so no I don't think this is enough to unilatterally end the ENTIRE agreement for breaches of PART of the agreement.

- no fire door in my room
- landlord / agents come into the property as they see fit with 0 notice - do the come into your room or common areas? In common areas of an HMO, they have 100% right to enter without notice. You're only paying for exclusive use of your room, and SHARED ACCESS to the other areas.
- notional amounts have been deducted from my deposit without my agreement - If your tenancy hasn't ended, they haven't deducted anything yet, they're just saying they will. At the end, request your full deposit back and they will have to justify any deductions. Note an arbiter / judge would decide, your agreement isn't important.
- my deposit is not protected, and from what i see online reviews state they do not give back / take months longer than they should. - This is a biggie. Check all 3 schemes, and check whether you received the 'Prescribed Info' around the start of your tenancy. If not, you can claim a penalty of 1-3x deposit. If the LL never protected it (not just late) and at the end if you find the LL delaying deposit return, I expect the penalty will be at the higher end ~3x deposit.
- there's not license which makes me believe my room is not fit for renting, a dummy wall has been put up in the kitchen across one side and that is my room. - no planning permission to put a wall there either according to register. - planning permission may not be necessary for minor internal changes, and there's nothing inherently wrong with a non load bearing stud wall.

I know it's not great i want to end the tenancy early, however i don't feel like i will get my deposit back at all (approx 1k) and i just want out of this situation asap rather than letting it drag to October.

Any advise will be welcomed,

Many thanks,

Sunzbck wrote: »

Should have mentioned that in the contract it does allow you to leave with a months notice if 1 week's rent is paid, so they can find a replacement, - what exactly does it say? Please quote. Does the notice have to align with tenancy periods? Is the 1 week rent fixed or only if they find a replacment? however would obviously prefer to find a way out of the contract other than paying for it... (given i don't even think they will give my full deposit back, i'd rather not give them more £££)

You DON'T have an inherent right to unilatterally terminate based on the licencing / other issues. Options are:
1) Use break clause
Please quote exactly what the break clause says. Does it apply during the fixed term? Does the notice have to expire in line with periods? Is the 1 week rent fixed or does it depend on how long it takes to find a replacement?

2) Use issues to negotiate with LL saying let me leave on x date and I won't pursue rent repayment order / deposit penalty / etc. Note if you do subsequently pursue those, the LL could claim any costs from your or hold you to your original fixed term tenancy as you broke the settlement agreement.

SmashedAvacado

I think this advice is too safe and pessimistic. You can strongly asset that the landlord is failing to comply with the law and that your occupation of the property is unlawful due to the landlords failure to comply with its basic legal obligations. As such you argue your tenancy is frustrated and can be ended now.

Contract law plays little part in this. You can’t lawfully occupy.

Comms69

SmashedAvacado wrote: »

I think this advice is too safe and pessimistic. You can strongly asset that the landlord is failing to comply with the law and that your occupation of the property is unlawful due to the landlords failure to comply with its basic legal obligations. As such you argue your tenancy is frustrated and can be ended now.

Contract law plays little part in this. You can’t lawfully occupy.

Incorrect. the Landlord cant lawfully let.


It has no bearing on the rights of the tenant to occupy. Tenancy continues.

SmashedAvacado

We are not talking about the "rights" of the tenant to occupy. We are talking about whether the tenant can assert that the landlord has no lawful right to grant the lease, and as such the lease "can" be frustrated giving the tenant the right to walk away. I can't see how a landlord could validly claim against a tenant in such circumstances - where he can't validly let...