Landlord didn't sign tenant's copy of tenancy agreement

no_moolah

Hello, I'm helping out a family member who has found themselves in a questionable renting arrangement. It has now transpired that upon moving in, they were given a blank copy of the tenancy agreement (without any signatures on it), but the landlord kept a copy of the agreement with both his and the tenant's signature on. The landlord apparently said that they (the LL) needed a copy of the agreement with signatures on it but the tenant only needed a blank copy.

To me this sounds very questionable. Could it negatively impact the tenant in any way? I know signatures aren't always needed but imagine that it might make it difficult for the tenant to prove the terms were agreed to, if it came to it. I don't know if there's anything else I'm missing though.

Thank you in advance.

(Short summary of arrangement: tenant is renting a detached outbuilding from a landlord - according to various sources, it probably should be an AST, but landlord seems to be passing tenant off as a lodger, ie no deposit protection, no EPC etc...)

user1977

no_moolah said:

according to various sources, it probably should be an AST, but landlord seems to be passing tenant off as a lodger, ie no deposit protection, no EPC etc...

What does the tenancy agreement say it is?

elsien

Background here.
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6354849/ast-or-lodging#latest

no_moolah

Thanks elsien. I'll give a quick summary below but was hoping to keep this on the topic of the agreement being signed/not signed because I've already had a lot of helpful responses on that thread.

Quick summary: tenant is renting a detached outbuilding from a landlord - according to various sources, it probably should be an AST, but landlord seems to be passing tenant off as a lodger, ie no deposit protection, no EPC etc - my opinon only but this might be because the LL never recieved planning permission to use the building as living accomodation (full details in linked thread). The agreement is vague and doesn't say what it is, but does refer to a 'tenancy' of 12 months where the 'tenant' makes monthly rent payments. A number of issues (repairs, fire safety etc) have led to tenant (and others) being concerned about living there and they are trying to find somewhere else so they can request to move out early.

canaldumidi

In legal terms it makes no difference. A contract exists, and can be proven if nothing else by the payment of rent and receipt of keys/accomodation.

Practically I suppose a dispute could arise regarding the terms of the contract, but a) ehst specifically in the contract might such a dispute be over and b) the unsigned copy gives the occupant a good strating point topresent to a judge. If the LL were to contest that, they'd have to produce their signed copy.

As an aside, for you and others, you should always keepa copy yourselfof contracts - nowadays it's easy enough to take a photo of the LL's signiture before handing it over if there is no duplicate signed copy provided.

TripleH

Also useful to initial every page as well.

The issue is more in a dispute that the contract you have a copy of is identical to the one the landlord has.

As long as there is a copy signed by both parties that should be fine.

theartfullodger

In England a tenancy agreement doesn't even need to be written.  Bonkers, come on England catch up!

doodling

Hi,

theartfullodger said:

In England a tenancy agreement doesn't even need to be written.  Bonkers, come on England catch up!

No, it is the very opposite of bonkers. If tenancies were required to be in writing then presumably tenants without the required documents in writing would have no rights?

That doesn't sound very good at all...

If there is nothing in writing then the courts will work out what the terms of the tenancy were (or even if there was a tenancy) from the evidence presented to them (probably with a bias towards the tenant) - that sounds like a reasonable position for the law to take 

newsgroupmonkey_

I've got loads of years of tenancy agreements. Often not signed by the Landlord - more for our info.
As long as ONE exists with both signatures, that's the important thing.

no_moolah

This has been very helpful to read through, and reassuring, so thanks everyone. A few lessons learnt from this experience I'm sure, getting a proper signature will be one of them... even if for peace of mind.