Argument over break clause

G_M

newsgroup_monkey wrote: »

Is this also not true?


This would normally guarantee both parties the rights and obligations for the fixed term and a minimum of one period.

Surely it would guarantee the tenant a minimum of 2 month's periods?
Unless something has changed, I was always under the impression that it was 1 month for the tenant, 2 months for the LL?

You're right but.... don'tconfuse the issue In this case it's the tenant serving notice.


If the tenant decides to stay, and the LL serves notice, then we'll pick up on your point!

G_M

Jumblebumble wrote: »

In addition the lettings agent accepted the notice so what ever the contract said it's tough as they presumably also interpreted it as you do.

Also a good point. How exactly did the "the letting agency initially accept.." Email? Letter? on the phone? What exactly did they write/say?

Whatever they said (or wrote) was said or written on the LL's behalf and is legally binding. Neither the LL nor agent can subsequently change their mind.