letting agency removed breaking clause from renewal agreement

Sachs

What does the Principal Agreement say terminating the agreement/giving notice? I'm not clear to what extent you are quoting the whole of the most recently signed agreement but if that's all of it then I would say the termination process in the original tenancy is still valid.

This forum's knee-jerk response is often 'Shouldn't have signed it/shouldn't have bought it" (a surprisingly anti-consumer stance for a pro-consumer website) but they often forget legislation such as the The Consumer Protection from Unfair  Trading Regulations 2008 exist specifically to protect the average person in situations just like this.

For example the overview regarding renewal states that letting agents should:

Act consistently with information already given to the tenant on fees for renewing or exiting a tenancy agreement at the precontractual stage. Ensure that the tenant has clear, accurate information about what they need to do to give notice, and alert them if they get this wrong.

So my starting point would be to link them to the guidance here https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/835089/Guidance_for_lettings_professionals_on_consumer_protection_law.pdf and ask them how they clearly, consistently and accurately explained to you the change in break clause.

DoaM

Sensory said:

DoaM said:

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).

Tenants have no control over what type of tenancy they have, do they?

In my 6 years' experience renting, agents were writing to me 3 months before the expiry of every agreement, asking what I was intending to do, and if I intended to stay, I would have to sign another agreement for 6 or 12 or 24 months. This included agents who managed properties on behalf of landlords, as well as agents who only handled the reletting/renewal process.

Yes they do ... the fact you've annually agreed to renewed fixed period contract terms doesn't mean you couldn't have let the original term fall into a periodic tenancy, you chose not to. (Of course the landlord could also serve notice to evict if you didn't agree, but that's a drawn out process and is not often in the landlord's best interests, especially where the tenant is reliable - i.e. pays on time, looks after the property, etc.).

Jumblebumble

need_an_answer said:

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

I disagree and would advise the OP to ignore your very bad advice about not taking it further.
You have no idea whatever what an ombudsman or district judge would decide

Jumblebumble

DoaM said:

Sensory said:

DoaM said:

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).

Tenants have no control over what type of tenancy they have, do they?

In my 6 years' experience renting, agents were writing to me 3 months before the expiry of every agreement, asking what I was intending to do, and if I intended to stay, I would have to sign another agreement for 6 or 12 or 24 months. This included agents who managed properties on behalf of landlords, as well as agents who only handled the reletting/renewal process.

Yes they do ... the fact you've annually agreed to renewed fixed period contract terms doesn't mean you couldn't have let the original term fall into a periodic tenancy, you chose not to. (Of course the landlord could also serve notice to evict if you didn't agree, but that's a drawn out process and is not often in the landlord's best interests, especially where the tenant is reliable - i.e. pays on time, looks after the property, etc.).

Maybe just Maybe the Tenant is more comfortable with the peace of mind  they will not be bothered  by the Landlord starting proceedings before 6 or 12 months is up
Maybe just Maybe they don't want the landlord increasing the rent

DoaM

Jumblebumble said:

Maybe just Maybe the Tenant is more comfortable with the peace of mind  they will not be bothered  by the Landlord starting proceedings before 6 or 12 months is up
Maybe just Maybe they don't want the landlord increasing the rent

All very true ... and all very much missing the point - Sensory mooted that the tenant has no control when it is clear that they do. The tenant can choose to accept or not the annual renewal. Their reasons for taking either stance are their own and are nobodies business but theirs, so it is not for me or anyone else (including you) to suppose what such reasons may be.

Sensory

DoaM said:

Sensory said:

DoaM said:

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).

Tenants have no control over what type of tenancy they have, do they?

In my 6 years' experience renting, agents were writing to me 3 months before the expiry of every agreement, asking what I was intending to do, and if I intended to stay, I would have to sign another agreement for 6 or 12 or 24 months. This included agents who managed properties on behalf of landlords, as well as agents who only handled the reletting/renewal process.

Yes they do ... the fact you've annually agreed to renewed fixed period contract terms doesn't mean you couldn't have let the original term fall into a periodic tenancy, you chose not to. (Of course the landlord could also serve notice to evict if you didn't agree, but that's a drawn out process and is not often in the landlord's best interests, especially where the tenant is reliable - i.e. pays on time, looks after the property, etc.).

I wasn't aware I ever had any choice in the matter. Agents obviously don't inform tenants a choice is available. Is it recommended to respond to an agent, stating a refusal to sign any renewal agreement and instead enforce a statutory periodic tenancy?

JaVo2004

Jumblebumble said:
I disagree and would advise the OP to ignore your very bad advice about not taking it further.

You have no idea whatever what an ombudsman or district judge would decide

I am not ashamed to admit that the renewal document introduced changes that were not requested by either me or the landlord. But the changes were there, and I signed the document. I was thinking me and the landlord were in sync about wanting flexible terms, but none of us raised this as an issue. And the landlord himself apparently didn't notice the change as he was unaware of it. He sure is giving a lot of power to the agency (ie, not wanting much hassle).

Still, I don't feel i have much ground to take this process any further.
I am coming up with terms it's either pay the fee, or continue the tenancy until June (where I'll have a very small window of 1 month to leave without paying fees).

Slithery

Sensory said:

Is it recommended to respond to an agent, stating a refusal to sign any renewal agreement and instead enforce a statutory periodic tenancy?

No need to respond at all, you can just ignore them. A periodic tenancy will automatically ensue as is your legal right.

Sensory

JaVo2004 said:

Jumblebumble said:
I disagree and would advise the OP to ignore your very bad advice about not taking it further.

You have no idea whatever what an ombudsman or district judge would decide

I am not ashamed to admit that the renewal document introduced changes that were not requested by either me or the landlord. But the changes were there, and I signed the document. I was thinking me and the landlord were in sync about wanting flexible terms, but none of us raised this as an issue. And the landlord himself apparently didn't notice the change as he was unaware of it. He sure is giving a lot of power to the agency (ie, not wanting much hassle).

Still, I don't feel i have much ground to take this process any further.
I am coming up with terms it's either pay the fee, or continue the tenancy until June (where I'll have a very small window of 1 month to leave without paying fees).

Considering you have direct contact with the landlord and he wasn't even aware there wasn't a break clause, you can still try negotiating a mutual agreement with him which can only help your case, especially if you've been a good tenant.

If it makes you feel better, I'm in the same boat (early surrender without a break clause), except my landlord already paid the agent's monthly commission (18%) in full at the start of the renewal (12 months' commission in advance), so not only am I liable for the reletting fees, I also have to reimburse the outstanding commission too (because the agent will not). I have no direct contact with my landlord as he's based in Hong Kong, and even the managing agent has a hard time getting a hold of him.

At the time of renewal I was naive enough to believe a break clause wasn't necessary for my circumstances, so I agreed to a renewal without one. Obviously, I also wasn't aware I didn't even need to agree to a renewal. In hindsight, I would have a preferred a periodic tenancy instead, as the rent had already increased in the new agreement, and the landlord is exceedingly indifferent, seemingly preferring the minimal amount of fees whilst simultaneously being the most uninvolved. We had actually signed a two-year agreement towards the end of the 2017, presumably to minimise renewal fees on his part due to the then-upcoming tenant fee ban.