For those wondering why many want S21 banned.

housebuyer143

This is nothing new, a small letting agent I was at 15 years ago always issued a section 21 with every renewal, because otherwise people just ignore the renewals as they have stated and you would get people just leaving with no notice at the end of the contracts etc, so it was harder to understand where you stood.
Those that wanted to go periodic then would need to call in and explain why and we could sort that, but it was fixed term as standard. 

I moved to another agent who didn't do this and uptake of renewals was low, so clearly the firmer method brings results. 

BobT36

 "Those that wanted to go periodic then would need to call in and explain why"
lol wow. No-one should ever have to explain why they're following the statutory process.. 

Jemma01

Haven't read the responses.
For all we know, the tenant might not be as great as you're describing, no one will insist on a guarantor for no reason. You're just clearly taking side. If you were a landlord, you wouldn't be posting this. There are tenants from hell, just like there are landlord from hell.

saajan_12

The current rules would be fine, the issue is the LL is doing some things incorrectly. The logical response to that is for the Tenant to stand up for their rights and enforce the current rules, NOT change the rules for LLs who do things correctly, and just want out of a business. Rights include
- T doesn't have to sign new tenancies or guarantees every year. They could refuse and let it go rolling. The LL threatening a S21 doesn't mean they'll follow through.
- A S21 sent with a new tenancy isn't enforcible. There has to be a 4 month gap. The T can ignore this. 

Also the arguments about why it would be sensible for a LL to keep this tenant don't really make sense. If it really is sensible (ie this isn't a nuisance tenant, the market rents really are what you think etc) then the LL wouldn't follow through with the S21 and eviction, so what is the T worried about? 

artyboy

BobT36 said:

 "Those that wanted to go periodic then would need to call in and explain why"
lol wow. No-one should ever have to explain why they're following the statutory process.. 

Agreed. Although I would like to hope that there could be a non-confrontational middle ground where a polite enquiry could be made asking if the tenant would mind sharing their intentions past the end of the fixed period. 

The problem of course is that the law inherently creates an adversarial relationship between tenant and landlord (albeit with some well intentioned idea of ensuring the right balance of protections)

_Penny_Dreadful

saajan_12 said:

- A S21 sent with a new tenancy isn't enforcible. There has to be a 4 month gap. The T can ignore this. 

I don’t think that is correct. There are many things that can invalidate a Section 21 but this is not one of them. A Section 21 needs to be served at least 4 months after the start of the initial tenancy and that appears to be the case. The notice is valid for the existing tenancy.