End of tenancy advice needed

rosieflowers

I think the LL may have a case for using the original inventory.

I don't think they have 'breached' the contract and certainly haven't made it void. You have a responsibility legally (nothing to do with the contract) to return it in the condition you took possession of it, so endeavour to do that and then you can go from there.

Are you anticipating lots of deductions? How long have you been in the property in total?

Puna48

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

I see what you mean, but if one contract ended and you make a new contract (with start and end dates; tenant's addresses; etc..), then it's effictevly a new contract? No? We did not extend the contract, we made a new one (new terms too).

Puna48

rosieflowers wrote: »

I think the LL may have a case for using the original inventory.

I don't think they have 'breached' the contract and certainly haven't made it void. You have a responsibility legally (nothing to do with the contract) to return it in the condition you took possession of it, so endeavour to do that and then you can go from there.

Are you anticipating lots of deductions? How long have you been in the property in total?

There a probably no deductions at all, I was just interested in legal side of it. We haven't done any damage to the property (just some lightbulbs needs changing) and a professional company will clean everything as per contract anyway.

Puna48

sal_III wrote: »

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

"A breach is material if, as a result of the breaching party’s failure to perform some aspect of the contract"

So they failed to perform inventory check in? No?

sal_III

Puna48 wrote: »

"A breach is material if, as a result of the breaching party’s failure to perform some aspect of the contract"

So they failed to perform inventory check in? No?

It's obvious you are trying to justify to yourself and/or others that you no longer need to abide by the contract terms. No amount of evidence or INAL definitions will change your mind, so I suggest you seek qualified legal advice.

Puna48

sal_III wrote: »

It's obvious you are trying to justify to yourself and/or others that you no longer need to abide by the contract terms. No amount of evidence or INAL definitions will change your mind, so I suggest you seek qualified legal advice.

Don't get me wrong - there are nothing bad in my contract terms. My interest is just in legal side of things, because (in my opinion) tenants let agencies and LLs sit on them without them even knowing that.

I've met my LL, very nice person. So was my last one. Nothing against any of them.

If I'd like to pursue a legal action, I'd go for qualified person.

Obviously I see things differently than people here (probably because I'm not a landlord).

tom9980

Puna48 wrote: »

Don't get me wrong - there are nothing bad in my contract terms. My interest is just in legal side of things, because (in my opinion) tenants let agencies and LLs sit on them without them even knowing that.

I've met my LL, very nice person. So was my last one. Nothing against any of them.

If I'd like to pursue a legal action, I'd go for qualified person.

Obviously I see things differently than people here (probably because I'm not a landlord).

The tenancy agreement began the moment you moved in, this is why the check in inventory is still valid. The new contract you signed just continues that tenancy agreement with new fixed dates.

G_M

tom9980 wrote: »

The tenancy agreement began the moment you moved in, this is why the check in inventory is still valid. The new contract you signed just continues that tenancy agreement with new fixed dates and terms.

You have occupied the property continuously since the start of the original tenancy. The original inventory is what the property condition should be compared against.

You never had a contract with the first agency - your contract was with the landlord. Change of agent is irrelevant, as would have been any intermediate inventory had it been done.

The landlord has not breached the tenancy, and even if he had (with regards to inventory) it would not make the contract null and void. It would merely give you the option of suing for your consequential financial losses, and I'm not sure what loss you might have incurred.....

Puna48

G_M wrote: »

You have occupied the property continuously since the start of the original tenancy. The original inventory is what the property condition should be compared against.

You never had a contract with the first agency - your contract was with the landlord. Change of agent is irrelevant, as would have been any intermediate inventory had it been done.

The landlord has not breached the tenancy, and even if he had (with regards to inventory) it would not make the contract null and void. It would merely give you the option of suing for your consequential financial losses, and I'm not sure what loss you might have incurred.....

Under definitions is 'the term' described as per current agreement, not anything before. Start and end dates are given. This is the agreement with the landlord, no other terms mentioned.

Inventory was supposed to be done in the beginning of 'The Term'. The Term is defined and no other dates mentioned. I still believe they didn't think about it and just issued me a generic contract.

G_M

sal_III wrote: »

It's obvious you are trying to justify to yourself and/or others that you no longer need to abide by the contract terms. No amount of evidence or INAL definitions will change your mind, so I suggest you seek qualified legal advice.

Seconded.


I have nothing further to add to my response above.