New tenants moving in before old fixed term ends

boundy

Hi guys, just a quick one.

My little bro is moving out of his rental. He has used the break clause and his last day is 30/04. He is physically moving out on the 25/04 but understands he is liable for the rent until the last day of the month, as his rental period starts on the 1st. No problem with this.

He's just told me the landlord is moving in a new tenant on the 26/04, so my brother asked if he would get a pro-rata refund for the 5 days and they responded saying that he's still liable until the 30/04, this doesn't sound right to me, why does the landlord get it both way? They are getting an extra 5 days rent as both my brother and the new tenant will be paying for the same period.

Any advice? 

FaceHead

Tell the landlord that he'll be moving most of his stuff out on the 25th, but may be coming and going and generally doing as he pleases with the flat he is paying to rent. If anyone else comes into the flat without permission, the police will be called. 

As far as the landlord is concerned he's still renting the flat until the 1st. 

Mahsroh

He should tell them that he’s paying for the property until 30th and therefore will retain possession until that date and nobody else can move in. 

deannagone

Just tell the LA/LL that he won't be moving out until 30/4 (if this does happen, under the present arrangement he loses nothing and maybe the extra time to clean up will help).  Hopefully, this will cause problems for the LA as they will have to delay new tenant moving in and this will make them revise their double money strategy.  But get any revised agreement in writing before the move out date.., preferably in a signed letter not email.

getmore4less

Change his mind to move out on the 30th.

When was the check out inventory planned?
Be unavailable till the 30th

princeofpounds

I agree with the others above that it's one way to force a negotiation.

However, if he does leave on the 25th he is (very likely*) not legally owed a partial refund for the rental period. This is because of the laws on apportionment of rent. A simplified explanation of this is that you pay in whole rental periods - use one day of a period, you owe rent for the full period.

It seems rather illogical, until you realise that the purpose of such laws is to stop people arguing over weeks, days, hours, minutes and seconds of rent (and similar payments). So the law allows the two parties contracting to define the period themselves, then forces them to stick to it.

Of course another consequence of this is that it makes little financial difference if he moves out on the 25th or 30th.

Note that often landlords and tenants will agree to pro-rata on a daily basis to avoid the kind of dispute you're seeing right now, or simply because many people wrongly assume that's the default legal position.

* why not certain? Because some forms of contract are treated differently to others. But assuming he pays monthly in advance as almost all ASTs are, what I have said is correct.

pretamang

princeofpounds said:

I agree with the others above that it's one way to force a negotiation.

However, if he does leave on the 25th he is (very likely*) not legally owed a partial refund for the rental period. This is because of the laws on apportionment of rent. A simplified explanation of this is that you pay in whole rental periods - use one day of a period, you owe rent for the full period.

It seems rather illogical, until you realise that the purpose of such laws is to stop people arguing over weeks, days, hours, minutes and seconds of rent (and similar payments). So the law allows the two parties contracting to define the period themselves, then forces them to stick to it.

Of course another consequence of this is that it makes little financial difference if he moves out on the 25th or 30th.

Note that often landlords and tenants will agree to pro-rata on a daily basis to avoid the kind of dispute you're seeing right now, or simply because many people wrongly assume that's the default legal position.

* why not certain? Because some forms of contract are treated differently to others. But assuming he pays monthly in advance as almost all ASTs are, what I have said is correct.

^^this is excellent advice - I went through it myself recently when I expected a pro-rata refund but on reading the rules and my contract found out I was legally due nothing.

You could get him to tell the landlord he has to changed his plans and can only move out on the 30th now - if LL has signed up new tenants it's likely he won't want to mess them around and I expect will be more willing to talk about a refund.

saajan_12

Key is he's using a break clause, (as opposed to a requested early termination which the LL could impose conditions or refuse). Under the break clause, he's entitled to terminate rent & occupation on 30th April. He's not entitled to terminate on 25th and get the 5 days rent back. So to avoid the LL getting double benefit, brother could enforce his right to stay until 30th, but note this may not actually benefit him if he has somewhere else to go anyway.

So, I'd make sure the LL knew that was brother's plan (to stay until 30th) and negotiate if LL wants him to leave earlier.
* If LL has already signed a new agreement with the new tenant, then they need to make sure the property is available by 26th - so I'd ask for 5 days pro rata in return for leaving by 25th.
* If LL hasn't signed the new agreement and can easily move the new tenant's move in to still have no gap etc, then the LL would be less bothered about the 25th date, as they'll still get rent from somewhere. Then I'd negotiate say 3 days rent back, in return for leaving 5 days early. That way, the LL benefits in some double rent (technically it would be a fee) but not as much as they do now. The tenant pays a little less than the full 5 days and leaves when they were planning to anyway. 

boundy

Thanks for the advice guys, as this is a house in London, the 5 days is a fair chunk of change. 

boundy

Hi guys, just to revisit this with another slight issue, my brothers new property has a few days delay and will now not be ready until the 1st, so his plan is to stay at his current rental until the 30th, grab a B&B on the night of the 30th and move into his new place on the 1st.

He has informed his landlady that he will be staying in the property until the 30th and she has told him he can't stay past the 25th as she has re-let the property, even though he has paid rent until the 30th.

Can she force him to leave on the 25th even though his tenancy doesn't end until the 30th?

The landlord would not accept an earlier surrender and my brother had to wait until he could use the break clause to leave, he did say he would go on the 25th but only out of courtesy, I believe he is still legally aloud to remain in the property until the 30th as that is when the tenancy comes to a legal end.

What are the ramifications if he just stays put until the 30th?

Thanks again for any advice. 

pinkshoes

boundy said:

Hi guys, just to revisit this with another slight issue, my brothers new property has a few days delay and will now not be ready until the 1st, so his plan is to stay at his current rental until the 30th, grab a B&B on the night of the 30th and move into his new place on the 1st.

He has informed his landlady that he will be staying in the property until the 30th and she has told him he can't stay past the 25th as she has re-let the property, even though he has paid rent until the 30th.

Can she force him to leave on the 25th even though his tenancy doesn't end until the 30th?

The landlord would not accept an earlier surrender and my brother had to wait until he could use the break clause to leave, he did say he would go on the 25th but only out of courtesy, I believe he is still legally aloud to remain in the property until the 30th as that is when the tenancy comes to a legal end.

What are the ramifications if he just stays put until the 30th?

Thanks again for any advice. 

Just write to the landlady stating that although he had planned to move out on the 25th, his tenancy is paid for until the 30th April, so as she has already confirmed she would not be returning any rent, then she has no right to move in any new tenants until his tenancy has finished on Midnight of the 30th April. 

He could be cheeky and suggest a refund of the 5 days plus some extra to cover the inconvenience of having to leave earlier than the end of his tenancy!