Help - landlord refusing to accept notice to terminate flat rental

greatcrested

saver_ali said:

greatcrested said:

Just to be sure, why not quote the wording here in full?

There is potential here for a conflict in wording if the original TA states it moves to a periodic tenancy and the renewal memorandum states there is a new 12 month contract.

Whilst the renewal memorandum  states the original terms apply (ie move to periodic), it (the renewal memo) is a later document which can take precedence - and it states 12 month fixed term.

Kind of Catch 22....or do I mean Circulus in Demonstrando?

...
Are you suggesting that the existence of the renewal memo renders this clause inapplicable, even though it says that the terms of the original agreement still apply? If the landlord rejects our invoking of this clause would we be able to revert back to the break clause?

Yes the existance of the renewal memo of 12 months fixed, which post-dates the original tenancy agreement, could over-ride /render inapplicable the periodic clause.

Yet as the renewal memo also makes the terms of the original TA applicable, hence the periodic clause applies.

Thus my claim of Circulus in Demonstrando (a circular argument).

Let us know how they respond. But one way or another either notice under the Break Clause, or via the periodic notice period, must apply.

saver_ali

Thanks @greatcrested. Hopefully we’ll be ok one way or another then. I will report back when we hear more. 

saajan_12

saver_ali said:

greatcrested said:

The only way it could affect their credit rating would be if

a) it went to court - not arbitation, AND

b) they lost in court and were ordered to pay something eg rent, AND

c) they still refused to pay what the court ordered (within, I think, 21 days?)

Then, and only after all 3 steps, would the CCJ appear on their credit record.

They have actually followed approach 2 in the end (from your earlier post). We looked at the tenancy agreement again and found something we’d missed, as it was in a completely different section to the break clause, which had sidetracked us. It said that at the end of the initial 12 months it reverted to a periodic tenancy, as someone had suggested in an earlier post, and they could leave at any time if they gave 2 months notice. So the landlord was wrong in what they had said. Nothing in the renewal memorandum agreement revokes that clause. (I’m very embarrassed that we didn’t find it before I posted on here!)

Anyway, we’ve basically just quoted that clause, told the landlord that the notice given last week was valid, and that they will be leaving at the end of April. We’ll tough it out if the landlord continues to be difficult.

Thanks for all your help. :-)

The periodic tenancy after a fixed term is very common. That clause just creates a Contractual Periodic Tenancy, without which a Statutory Periodic Tenancy would arise after the fixed term. Nothing further would need to be signed for either a CPT or SPT to kick in. 
The difference is you've RENEWED the original fixed term, for a new 12 months. That overrides the old contract. The other terms stay the same ie rent amount, rent dates, still have to not damage property, etc etc. The clause on CPT also remains, so after the fixed term (ie the new fixed term) the tenancy would become a CPT if you're still in occupation, with nothing further to be signed. I Otherwise it would be illogical to sign a renewal, so I think its pretty clear what the meeting of minds was. 

So I would really NOT argue on the basis of a CPT, as that's very likely to fail. Your best bet is the break clause and when that can kick in. At best 9 months from the start of the tenancy ie leave 30th April, at worst 9 months from the new fixed term ie leave 31st May - either way, not a huge difference. 

saver_ali

saajan_12 said:

The periodic tenancy after a fixed term is very common. That clause just creates a Contractual Periodic Tenancy, without which a Statutory Periodic Tenancy would arise after the fixed term. Nothing further would need to be signed for either a CPT or SPT to kick in. 
The difference is you've RENEWED the original fixed term, for a new 12 months. That overrides the old contract. The other terms stay the same ie rent amount, rent dates, still have to not damage property, etc etc. The clause on CPT also remains, so after the fixed term (ie the new fixed term) the tenancy would become a CPT if you're still in occupation, with nothing further to be signed. I Otherwise it would be illogical to sign a renewal, so I think its pretty clear what the meeting of minds was. 

So I would really NOT argue on the basis of a CPT, as that's very likely to fail. Your best bet is the break clause and when that can kick in. At best 9 months from the start of the tenancy ie leave 30th April, at worst 9 months from the new fixed term ie leave 31st May - either way, not a huge difference. 

Thank you for that, although I don’t really understand what you mean by the meeting of minds. 

We have already given notice on the basis of the CPT, so we’ll have to wait and see if they accept or reject it. At least we can revert to the break clause, which could be either end of April or end of May.

We do feel that the landlords took advantage of my son and his girlfriend’s inexperience. The landlords emailed them near the end of the original term and only offered them the options to vacate, renew for 12 months, or renew for 24 months. There was never indication that they could just stay on the existing contract. Is there any scope for claiming that the terms of the new renewal agreement, or the agreement itself, was unfair?

greatcrested

I agree with Saajan's interpretation.

It certainly may have been a little 'unfair' not to mention periodic tenancy as an option, but that's not a legal argument. Sadly it's very common.

Just as 'ignorance of the law is no excuse' is commonly stated when someone breaks the law, so in circumstances like this lack of knowledge of tenancy or contract law is no excuse. They signed a document, the renewal, and are therefore legally assumed to have understood and agreed it. They always had the option to take advice before signing.

Indeed,since the original contract laid what happens after the fixed term ends (the CPT) all they had to do was read that document.

saver_ali

Just an update for those that helped us a few weeks back...... The landlords have agreed that my son and his girlfriend can terminate their tenancy on 30th April. They said that notice couldn’t be given before 1st April, but they would accept just 1 month due to the circumstances (family illness), so that was a good outcome in the end. 

Thanks to those of you who posted and gave us the confidence to push back.

saajan_12

Thanks for coming back OP. For anyone in a similar situation in future, the outcome doesn't necessarily reflect what you had a right to legally but goes to show you can always discuss / negotiate / mutually agree the next steps with the LL regardless. Great outcome for you!