1977 Rent Act Tenancy - Nightmare Situation

elsien

I thought it sounded familiar. 

propertyrental

Why the new thread? Keep the full history all in one place.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6427849/1977-rent-act-tenancy-nightmare-situation/p1

GDB2222

I must say that this sounds incredibly risky to me. Having a 1977 Act tenancy is incredibly valuable. You might well be able to negotiate a payment of 30-50% of the property value to vacate. Why you would want to harm the relationship by withholding rent and earning a paltry rate of interest on the money is way beyond me. 

You are arguing about a missing notice, not a failure to maintain the property or something important like that.  

CKhalvashi

GDB2222 said:

I must say that this sounds incredibly risky to me. Having a 1977 Act tenancy is incredibly valuable. You might well be able to negotiate a payment of 30-50% of the property value to vacate. Why you would want to harm the relationship by withholding rent and earning a paltry rate of interest on the money is way beyond me. 

You are arguing about a missing notice, not a failure to maintain the property or something important like that.  

I can only agree with this, risking a very secure tenancy specifically with regulated rents is not a good idea IMO.

The savings from doing what you're doing will presumably be nothing compared to the rent you are paying vs market rent.

silvercar

You really are playing into your landlord’s hand. At some point they will take action for unpaid rent and you risk losing your tenancy. You say you are entitled to withhold rent and that may be true, but do you have the funds to defend this in court? I would think that you are risking a judge saying that your claim to be entitled to withhold funds is vexatious. 

Woofiedog

TonyMMM said:

I think this was covered (at length) in a previous thread ...

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6427849/1977-rent-act-tenancy-nightmare-situation/p1

Read the law. There is no rent arrears. The landlord is not entitled to get the rent until they serve a s.48.

What are you lot doing posting on landlord tenant issues when you have no idea of the law.

THE LAW

Is Section 48 an eviction notice?

Section 48 Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 provides that a landlord must "by notice" give the tenant an address in England or Wales where the tenant can serve notices upon the landlord. The penalty for failure is that no rent is payable until it is complied with.

theartfullodger

The new owner (not yet landlord. ? ) appears not to understand the law.  So is likely to get loads of other things wrong. Suggest -i'm sure you are doing it already) meticulous record keeping, proof of service of anything you send them?

Given your position suggest you refer, until s48 served, to new owner as "owner" rather than "landlord" (as you'll know they are different.

Old owner, assuming as I'm sure they are, your assertions are correct, still has some responsibilities.

Do we take it you've got owner's name & address from eg land registry?

Familiar with shelter's website on rent act tenancies? (Imho best source of info..).

You'll be aware s48 does not have a defined format - are you sure you've not been given the info but not considered it an s48 notice?

Iirc without similar (possibly identical) s3 notice he's liable for fines and criminal record (sadly rarely if ever enforced).

Good luck.

MobileSaver

Woofiedog said:

silvercar said:

You really are playing into your landlord’s hand. At some point they will take action for unpaid rent and you risk losing your tenancy. You say you are entitled to withhold rent and that may be true, but do you have the funds to defend this in court? I would think that you are risking a judge saying that your claim to be entitled to withhold funds is vexatious. 

There are no rent arrears presently becuase the landlord is not owed rent until they honour their obligatoins to provide me with a s.48.

So if the landlord and/or agent turn up in court and show a Royal Mail certificate of posting from months ago which they claim was their official notification to you of the address of the landlord ...

... they further explain to the court that you subsequently contacted them (so confirming you received the notice) preposterously insisting that they supply you with a copy of the contract between the agent and "landlord" and that you refused to pay your rent until they did so ...

... that's only going to end one way and it's unlikely to be in your favour.

GDB2222

Woofiedog said:

TonyMMM said:

I think this was covered (at length) in a previous thread ...

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6427849/1977-rent-act-tenancy-nightmare-situation/p1

Read the law. There is no rent arrears. The landlord is not entitled to get the rent until they serve a s.48.

What are you lot doing posting on landlord tenant issues when you have no idea of the law.

THE LAW

Is Section 48 an eviction notice?

Section 48 Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 provides that a landlord must "by notice" give the tenant an address in England or Wales where the tenant can serve notices upon the landlord. The penalty for failure is that no rent is payable until it is complied with.

Thanks. I was aware of the law, but couldn’t have given you the reference without doing a search.

Can I ask what the long term plan is? Sooner or later, the LL is going to get his ducks in a row. Or, he’ll sell it to someone else who is more organised. So, what do you want to achieve?

TripleH

Have you stated in writing why you have taken the actions you have done?

When you try to counter sue, if you can show that you have followed the law and the other party is all-in the wrong. If you have kept quiet or only verbally responded, you might get an unsympathetic judge.

In disputes, in my experience, the court likes to reach a common ground unless one party can present irrefutable evidence they have committed no wrong.