letting agency removed breaking clause from renewal agreement

JaVo2004

I am renting through agency for a few years now. When the contract was first signed, we all agreed (me, agency and landlord) that the first agreement would be for a fixed 12 months term, and following agreements would also be 12 months, but more flexible (with a "break clause"). This was agreed verbally at the agency.

Since then, all agreements (apart from the first one) had this "break clause" clause on it.
The last agreement (signed late last year) and still active, a lot smaller, had lots of omissions (break clause was not there, and many other clauses regarding the landlord's expectation on garden maintenance, etc). I didn't think too much about it at the time.

I am trying to end this tenancy to relocate elsewhere, and the agency just replied saying my contract does NOT have a break clause. So if I want to leave early, the landlord would have to accept and I would have to pay a "landlord re-letting fee" of £540. I am shocked.

I know I am guilty of signing a renewal agreement without this clause (and with a lot of other omissions). But... Do I have any grounds to complain based on the fact that it was verbally agreed at the beginning, all previous contracts had that clause and it was removed from this latest contract without anyone's "permission"?
Also how reasonable is this "landlord re-letting fee" of £540?

I am !!!!!! off at the agency and this obvious extortion.

JaVo2004

Agency just replied about the omissions saying:
"A lot of the supplemental agreements are now renewed on a fixed 12 month contract. The tenancy agreement would have had all the terms and special negotiated clauses in it. When we renew it is a supplemental agreement so would not have all the special negotiated clauses in it."

In other words, all the things negotiated with the landlord are still on, except the the break clause?!

DoaM

Why were you renewing every year? You didn't need to - you could have moved to a periodic tenancy ... I think that's the term. (The LA was probably pushing this, not the LL, so that the LA could get additional fees every year).

need_an_answer

I agree you didn't need to renew yearly...however whats done is done.
In relation to your question over whether £540 to find a new tenant is acceptable as a LL I pay my agent £500plus vat for the tenant find service.With that in mind if you are leaving the tenancy early and a replacement tenant needs finding then its not an overly extortionate fee that the LL is able to pass on to you to cover.

JaVo2004

But the main question is:
- Can the Letting Agency "sneakily" remove the break-clause when creating the renewal document, without anyone's permission (I am assuming the renewal document should inherit the same terms as the previous unless directly stated by any of the parts)?
- Can I complain based on the fact that a verbal agreement was not reflected on the document (and I didn't notice)?

need_an_answer

The letting agency produce a tenancy agreement...you are asked to review it before you sign it and it would be up to you to have read and understood the terms of the document.
By all means query the contents of the document but my understanding is that on signing it you agree to the written terms.
You must not assume that just because you are renewing all the terms stay the same.
You should have read the agreement before signing...saying you didn't notice is no excuse or grounds to take the complaint further

If you have had verbal terms then again by all means query that but my guess would be that written signed terms will always override any verbal agreement

theartfullodger

If you weren't happy with the missing break clause why did you sign?

I try to avoid signing contracts I don't like.

davidmcn

In theory errors in written contract can be corrected, but how do you propose to evidence the verbal "agreement", or to prove that it was intended to supersede whatever ended up in the written agreement?

need_an_answer

davidmcn said:

In theory errors in written contract can be corrected, but how do you propose to evidence the verbal "agreement", or to prove that it was intended to supersede whatever ended up in the written agreement?

Although its unlikely to be an error.I would suspect that there is no break clause specifically so the LL is not going to be put in the position of paying to find onward tenants should the existing one wish to leave mid term.

Its also likely that the LL had to pay for the renewal agreement.

Its a very "canny" agent who can persuade a LL that a fixed term tenancy is the best way forward and present it to them that the charge if early terminated will be met by the tenant....

Its not a very savvy LL who wastes his money on a fixed term contract when a rolling would have sufficed.

But some LL and indeed tenants believe the agent more than they should.....

JaVo2004

theartfullodger said:

If you weren't happy with the missing break clause why did you sign?

I try to avoid signing contracts I don't like.

It's complicated. I didn't sign a fresh new complete agreement.
Agency calls it "supplemental agreement", with lots of omissions and assumptions.
- all negotiated things that are omitted means it should be as per previous agreement.
- except the break clause, it's omission means it's excluded.

Nowhere in the document says that the break clause is now excluded.
It's complicated!!

need_an_answer

If it were that complicated then why sign it without it being fully explained to you.

I'm sorry but it seems to me that you knew full well the break clause wasn't there when you signed but at the time it didn't seem significant to you....now you want to move and break the agreement of course its very important.

Either pay the re advertising and tenant find fees or ask the agency for details of their ombudsman to take your complaint further and provide them with the appropriate evidence in order to adjudicate.