Any nasties in this AST?

Mutton_Geoff

A friend has asked me to look over this AST they will be signing shortly. Could the experts look it over and let me know if there are any nasties in it please? - Hamptons sample AST

theartfullodger

I have yet to read any AST that did not have a flaw. And that includes ASTs that I've got from a reputable source (landlord association or gov.uk ) and already corrected.


Your friend will have zero chance in persuading Hamptons to change the wording. Simply sign then ignore any daft clauses: Nothing landlord/agent can do but evict.

Mutton_Geoff

I've spotted a couple, inc the TV licence one:


2.2.10 To purchase at their own expense the appropriate television broadcast receiving licence in respect of any television receiver at the Premises regardless of ownership and to ensure at all times during the Tenancy that there is a current valid television receiving licence in force in respect of any television set in the Premises whether belonging to the Landlord or the Tenant or any hire company and should the Tenant have a hired television receiver to arrange for its return to the hirer at the End of the Tenancy.


I have modified it to only require a licence if the TV is used in accordance with legislation which requires a licence to be held rather than a blanket obligation. And who hires a TV these days?

FreeBear

The TV licence clause hasn't kept up with technology. Quite a few people will watch broadcast (and iPlayer) streamed services on a laptop, phone, or tablet. But as the clause currently stands, if there is no TV on the premises, no contractual obligation exists requiring the purchase of a TV licence.

One clause that I spotted that might cause problems -

2.10.1 Not to make or have made any duplicate keys fobs security devices and remote controls to the Premises nor to replace nor add any new locks to the Premises without the prior written consent of the Landlord or their Agent (except in the case of an emergency). The Tenant agrees to provide one full set of keys fobs and remote controls of the new locks at all times to the Landlord or their Agent.

Common advice on this forum for most tenants is to "change the locks" and not hand over any spare keys. Having an unknown (or possibly untrusted) third party holding a set of keys could conceivably invalidate any contents insurance policy.

Mutton_Geoff

FreeBear wrote: »

The TV licence clause hasn't kept up with technology. Quite a few people will watch broadcast (and iPlayer) streamed services on a laptop, phone, or tablet. But as the clause currently stands, if there is no TV on the premises, no contractual obligation exists requiring the purchase of a TV licence

I was thinking the other way round. My friend will have a smart TV but it's entirely feasible that they won't watch any live TV and therefore not require a licence which would thus be in breach of their AST. I've drafted an amendment for that and will also include something for your keys tip.

Jumblebumble

This clause is unenforceable as Ofgem rules allow a tenant in these circumstances to change supplier unconditionally
( although it would be good manners to comply)


2.2.4 Not to have any additional key meters installed at the Premises or any other meter which
is operational by the insertion of coins or a pre-paid card or key nor change the supplier of
the utilities without first notifying the Landlord or their Agent in writing of the name and
address of the new supplier

Jumblebumble

Mutton_Geoff wrote: »

I've spotted a couple, inc the TV licence one:


2.2.10 To purchase at their own expense the appropriate television broadcast receiving licence in respect of any television receiver at the Premises regardless of ownership and to ensure at all times during the Tenancy that there is a current valid television receiving licence in force in respect of any television set in the Premises whether belonging to the Landlord or the Tenant or any hire company and should the Tenant have a hired television receiver to arrange for its return to the hirer at the End of the Tenancy.


I have modified it to only require a licence if the TV is used in accordance with legislation which requires a licence to be held rather than a blanket obligation. And who hires a TV these days?

How about if the tenant doesn't need one cause they are a student ?
Why should Hamptons try to insist that they buy one?

In limited circumstances, students can be covered by the licence at their parents’ address. The device must be powered by its own internal batteries – e.g. a tablet or mobile phone - and must not be plugged it into the mains when receiving television. This use is enabled by the Regulations governing TV Licensing.

Marvel1

Mutton_Geoff wrote: »

I was thinking the other way round. My friend will have a smart TV but it's entirely feasible that they won't watch any live TV and therefore not require a licence which would thus be in breach of their AST. I've drafted an amendment for that and will also include something for your keys tip.

What about BBC I-Player?

Recording live TV? Not needed, due to catch-up.

AlexMac

We're all overthinking this... The best advice was in the first post...

theartfullodger wrote: »

...Your friend will have zero chance in persuading Hamptons to change the wording. Simply sign then ignore any daft clauses: Nothing landlord/agent can do but evict.

Just concentrate on the important stuff; is the inventory and/or condition report accurate, will you have to pay for this and any end of tenancy inventory check, is the deposit protected, and are there any obvious faults or problems with the property or its services such as fixtures, heating, hot water, etc?

Pay your rent on time and don't sub-let it for AirBnB raves; in practice, the landlord won't give a toss whether you need a TV licence, just as they won't come round to check if you're running a bordello, or a leather tannery or all the other weird things I've seen prohibited in leases...

Mutton_Geoff

theartfullodger wrote: »

Your friend will have zero chance in persuading Hamptons to change the wording. Simply sign then ignore any daft clauses: Nothing landlord/agent can do but evict.

I'm not sure about that, I have always refused to accept standard documents and amended ASTs before I've signed on rental properties I have dealt with over the last 10 years.


Same with estate agents sales contracts. Never sign the standard offering and always amend it to my taste.


I'll let you know how they get on!

SouthLondonUser

FreeBear wrote: »

Common advice on this forum for most tenants is to "change the locks" and not hand over any spare keys. Having an unknown (or possibly untrusted) third party holding a set of keys could conceivably invalidate any contents insurance policy.

Of course this means the tenant must never arrange for handymen, boiler engineers etc to collect the keys from the estate agent, but the tenant should always be present when these people attend.

It can also create problems in the final period of the tenancy, when the agent will insist on showing the property to other potential tenants when the current tenant is away, at work, etc.

Finally, the tenant could be held liable if changing the locks means the landlord cannot access the property to rectify or minimise some damage. E.g. the neighbours tell the landlord about a burst pipe while the tenant is on a 2-week holiday abroad. Unlikely, but not impossible.

By the way, I remember a French guy who had just moved to London and was shocked that his landlord had proposed this clause. He must have asked every single person he knew whether this was normal, and made it a big point to stress that this would be inconceivable in France.

Can't say I disagree with the guy, to be honest.