End of tenancy advice needed

sal_III

Puna48 wrote: »

Nice one!

But where do you stand with the breach of contract question? Taken into account that the contract start date is 6 months later than the only check in report, that was done for the first tenancy term, by a totally different agency and the contract clearly says the LL needs to provide report in the beginning of the tenancy.

Your tenancy began when you moved in the property - for that you have a check-in deposit. Just because you have signed a new piece of paper doesn't change that. by your logic you will ask for check-out/in inventory every time you renew...

Even if the exact wording of your contract with the agency states that the check-in inventory is a must. Not providing it under this circumstances is a minor breach of contract and doesn't make the contract invalid/void. The non-breaching party (you) must still abide by the contract. You can seek compensation from the breaching party if you can prove it caused you loss (good luck with that).

Bottom line is your contract is valid and you have check-in inventory to compare against on check-out for the purpose of deposit deductions.

Comms69

Puna48 wrote: »

Hi!

I've got some questions about end of tenancy:

1) We've been living at the same place for a year now, but after half a year our landlord changed agency, which means our first contract ended with the first agency and then we started a new contract/tenancy with the new agency. - no it didn't. Your contract was never with an agency.

The first agency provided us a check in inventory report. At the end of the first contract, we got all our deposit back (because landlord told the first agency to do so), - fair enough, unnecessary, but whatever but there was no one to check the property professionally - only landlord himself came to us and just a had a quick look around the flat. - The landlord has the final say no matter what

The second agency never came to do the inventory report, even if it says in the contract, that landlord is responsible for providing a fully comprehensive report at the beginning of the tenancy. And the agency is acting behalf of the landlord. - irrelevant

Does it mean the landlord/agency has breached the contract and they cannot deduct anything from the deposit? - no

2) Since the landlord breached the contract, does it mean the contract is void, since contract needs to be watched as full, not just partly? - no

Sorry if that's in the wrong thread, please move it if so.

Thank you in advance.

What is it you want to achieve?

need_an_answer

Puna48 wrote: »

You are correct - I've got a contract with LL, not the agency.

The contract clearly states the start date of the contract and didn't mention the first contract at all. Therefore, the first contract is out of question.

The contract also clearly states, that the LL will be responsible for providing a fully comprehensive inventory check in at the beginning of the term (the term is described at the beginning of this contract).

That said, the inventory is part of our contract, which they didn't follow. In my eyes they breached the contract.

Then me as a LL and you as a tenant must therefore agree to differ....

As I said earlier if you dispute the deposit deductions then arbitration is your way to go.
If you wish to dispute the wording of the contract then that's a matter for you and your LL to discuss but unless you can prove that you have lost financially then its very difficult to quantify what you actually hope to get out of your challenge for breach of contract.

Deposit deductions and breach of contract are 2 separate things.
What have you lost as a result of the LL's actions in not providing you an updated inventory?

Puna48

No, it is not a renewal. It is a brand new contract, using brand new agency.

My last contract ended and couldn't been renewed. Don't mix those two up.

Puna48

Sorry, my replies are going wrong places. I'm on my phone and the quote option doesn't work.

need_an_answer

So what is it you want …???

You clearly feel you have a case against someone,at this stage I'm not sure who you think that is...but what do you consider the right outcome to be?

Who do you feel breached the contract?

In the perfect world name your compensation ...and we can advise if its realistic.

sal_III

Puna48 wrote: »

No, it is not a renewal. It is a brand new contract, using brand new agency.

My last contract ended and couldn't been renewed. Don't mix those two up.

It's still the same tenancy with the same LL and the same tenant. The chance of intermediary Agency is not really relevant. The contract is between you and the LL

Puna48

need_an_answer wrote: »

So what is it you want …???

You clearly feel you have a case against someone,at this stage I'm not sure who you think that is...but what do you consider the right outcome to be?

In the perfect world name your compensation ...and we can advise if its realistic.

I didn't look for compensation (there are nothing to compensate). I was just wondering if a contract is agreed and one side doesn't do what it was agreed to, is the contract breached?

If the contract is breached, then it should be void and the tenant (in this case it's me) is not obliged to follow the contract either?

Just describing how I see it and it might not be right. I was just asking for advice.

(Btw, if the quote option doesn't work for you, then turn your phone 90 degrees and try again - worked for me)

need_an_answer

sal_III wrote: »

It's still the same tenancy with the same LL and the same tenant. The chance of intermediary Agency is not really relevant. The contract is between you and the LL

this...…..i'm in total agreement

sal_III

Puna48 wrote: »

If the contract is breached, then it should be void and the tenant (in this case it's me) is not obliged to follow the contract either?

As explained in my previous post the contract breach is minor at best, so you are still bound by the contract.

What is the Difference Between a Material and Minor Breach of Contract?
A breach of contract can be material or minor. The parties’ obligations and remedies depend on which type of breach occurred.

A breach is material if, as a result of the breaching party’s failure to perform some aspect of the contract, the other party receives something substantially different from what the contract specified. For example, if the contract specifies the sale of a box of tennis balls and the buyer receives a box of footballs, the breach is material. When a breach is material, the nonbreaching party is no longer required to perform under the contract and has the immediate right to all remedies for breach of the entire contract.

Factors that the courts consider in determining materiality include:

1. The amount of benefit received by the nonbreaching party;
2. Whether the nonbreaching party can be adequately compensated for the damages;
3. The extent of performance by the breaching party;
4. Hardship to the breaching party;
5. Negligent or willful behavior of the breaching party; and
6. The likelihood that the breaching party will perform the remainder of the contract.

A breach is minor if, even though the breaching party failed to perform some aspect of the contract, the other party still receives the item or service specified in the contract. For example, unless the contract specifically provides that “time is of the essence” (i.e. deadlines are firm) or gives a specific delivery date of goods, a reasonable delay by one of the parties may be considered only a minor breach of the contract. When a breach is minor, the nonbreaching party is still required to perform under the contract, but may recover damages resulting from the breach. For example, when a seller’s delay in delivering goods is a minor breach of contract, the buyer must still pay for the goods but may recover any damages caused by the delay.