Section 13 rent increase

Exodi

Halabala9 said:

There need to be some level of reasonability, we both sign a contract that says post or email and in writing. It doesn't mention pigeons, so does it mean that I should check every pigeon around the building as one of them might have a message for me?

I won't lie, this comment made me chuckle, but being serious I am wondering whether you are being deliberately disingenuous on this point (conflating deemed service and valid service).

If your LL had decided to serve a notice via carrier pigeon, then there would be an obligation to show on the balance of probabilities that the notice was successfully delivered to you - obviously this is hard and impractical to do. There is not this obligation by post or email as stipulated by your contract, and the reason for this clause about deemed service is specifically because of people like you. It's in there because LL's/agents got fed up of tenants constantly claiming "I didn't get no letter" or "I didn't see no email", despite post/email having very high successful delivery rates.

The below quote is a textbook example of why these clauses exist:

Halabala9 said:

3) I stay silent. Next month I pay my normal rent. Then she will obviously is going to contact me (the question is how), if it’s by WhatsApp again, if I answer, she will say that the photo is sent above. If I don’t answer, she will most likely try to phone me or send an email or a letter. And then it would be a good moment for me to pick up the Tenancy Agreement and play dumb. Theoretically WhatsApp showing a small icon that something is received, but it means nothing, I am not the only one using my phone, somebody else might have pick it up and close it not even checking, I might have been doing something on the phone (playing the game) clicked and closed not even noticing etc. I have got no obligation to use WhatsApp at all.

I think option 3 is the best. In the worst case scenario, I would have to pay it + probably 3% delay penalty or something (at least I hope it’s only this).

I really hope you are not being serious. WhatsApp is actually the ideal platform for the LL because it has a simple way of showing if a message was successfully delivered. You pretending that you suddenly stopped using your own phone or you forgot how to read or whatever it is you plan will just make you look daft and disingenuous should this ever end up in front of a tribunal. Personally I wouldn't have the audacity to pretend I delegated my phone responses at exactly the same time I happened to be served an s13 notice.

Lastly just to go back to an earlier comment you said that is a real bugbear of mine:

Halabala9 said:

We are talking about £200 here but as I mentioned, it's not about money

So would you pretend to lose your memory or whatever it is you end up doing if the rent increase was 1p?

It's nearly always about the money. Emotions just provide fuel or justification.

silvercar

You could just reply and say that you were surprised by the increase notice, you are going to be leaving soon, you can’t afford an increase in rent, so could she consider not increasing the rent until at least October.

Bottom line is that she will apply to have the owed rent deducted from your deposit if you don’t pay it and haven’t reached agreement, so the onus is on you.

RHemmings

user1977 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

RHemmings said:

Halabala9 said:

Edit:

https://www.familylaw.co.uk/news_and_comment/service-by-whatsapp

That seems like a totally different situation. They rather didn't have any agreement signed that specifically mentioned methods of notices. 

In your situation you have the clause in the contract. Hence, you could easily wait a while and then reply to your landlord pointing out that the contract specifies notices sent through the post and that you are waiting for a notice delivered in that way before you consider the notice to be valid. Legally that may or may not hold, but you can do it and the most likely result is that the landlord will re-issue the notice. 

It won't hold, because as noted previously the contract doesn't specify notices by post, but the landlord won't know that so it would be a decent delaying tactic.

Also, acknowledging that you have received a notice would somewhat hamper your ability to later argue that the landlord needs to prove you received it...

The notice has been received. If the OP were to try to argue that it hasn't been received, then that would be lying. Which is significantly inadvisable in legal contexts. I note your wording 'that the landlord needs to prove you received it', but feel that this is flying too close to legally denying the truth. 

What happens, for example, if the tenant says 'you need to prove I received it' and the landlord asks (in writing, our court) 'did you receive it?'

Personally I would not go the 'you need to prove I received it', and go the 'please resend the notice by an appropriate method as stated in the contract' route. As @BarelySentientAI says, as a delaying tactic.

Herzlos

I think there's confusion over what "in writing" means. It doesn't mean "on paper", just that it's written down and recorded. So WhatsApp would be "in writing" and if you've send any communication to the land lord over WhatsApp it'd be deemed a reasonable method for her to contact you.

You could try and argue you've changed number so didn't get it, but you'd likely need to prove that.

user1977

RHemmings said:

user1977 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

RHemmings said:

Halabala9 said:

Edit:

https://www.familylaw.co.uk/news_and_comment/service-by-whatsapp

That seems like a totally different situation. They rather didn't have any agreement signed that specifically mentioned methods of notices. 

In your situation you have the clause in the contract. Hence, you could easily wait a while and then reply to your landlord pointing out that the contract specifies notices sent through the post and that you are waiting for a notice delivered in that way before you consider the notice to be valid. Legally that may or may not hold, but you can do it and the most likely result is that the landlord will re-issue the notice. 

It won't hold, because as noted previously the contract doesn't specify notices by post, but the landlord won't know that so it would be a decent delaying tactic.

Also, acknowledging that you have received a notice would somewhat hamper your ability to later argue that the landlord needs to prove you received it...

The notice has been received. If the OP were to try to argue that it hasn't been received, then that would be lying. Which is significantly inadvisable in legal contexts. I note your wording 'that the landlord needs to prove you received it', but feel that this is flying too close to legally denying the truth. 

What happens, for example, if the tenant says 'you need to prove I received it' and the landlord asks (in writing, our court) 'did you receive it?'

Nobody is currently being cross-examined on oath about it. It's perfectly normal and acceptable legal advice not to unnecessarily admit receipt of a notice.

BarelySentientAI

user1977 said:

RHemmings said:

user1977 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

RHemmings said:

Halabala9 said:

Edit:

https://www.familylaw.co.uk/news_and_comment/service-by-whatsapp

That seems like a totally different situation. They rather didn't have any agreement signed that specifically mentioned methods of notices. 

In your situation you have the clause in the contract. Hence, you could easily wait a while and then reply to your landlord pointing out that the contract specifies notices sent through the post and that you are waiting for a notice delivered in that way before you consider the notice to be valid. Legally that may or may not hold, but you can do it and the most likely result is that the landlord will re-issue the notice. 

It won't hold, because as noted previously the contract doesn't specify notices by post, but the landlord won't know that so it would be a decent delaying tactic.

Also, acknowledging that you have received a notice would somewhat hamper your ability to later argue that the landlord needs to prove you received it...

The notice has been received. If the OP were to try to argue that it hasn't been received, then that would be lying. Which is significantly inadvisable in legal contexts. I note your wording 'that the landlord needs to prove you received it', but feel that this is flying too close to legally denying the truth. 

What happens, for example, if the tenant says 'you need to prove I received it' and the landlord asks (in writing, our court) 'did you receive it?'

Nobody is currently being cross-examined on oath about it. It's perfectly normal and acceptable legal advice not to unnecessarily admit receipt of a notice.

Don't tell him your name, Pike!

Halabala9

BarelySentientAI said:

user1977 said:

RHemmings said:

user1977 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

RHemmings said:

Halabala9 said:

Edit:

https://www.familylaw.co.uk/news_and_comment/service-by-whatsapp

That seems like a totally different situation. They rather didn't have any agreement signed that specifically mentioned methods of notices. 

In your situation you have the clause in the contract. Hence, you could easily wait a while and then reply to your landlord pointing out that the contract specifies notices sent through the post and that you are waiting for a notice delivered in that way before you consider the notice to be valid. Legally that may or may not hold, but you can do it and the most likely result is that the landlord will re-issue the notice. 

It won't hold, because as noted previously the contract doesn't specify notices by post, but the landlord won't know that so it would be a decent delaying tactic.

Also, acknowledging that you have received a notice would somewhat hamper your ability to later argue that the landlord needs to prove you received it...

The notice has been received. If the OP were to try to argue that it hasn't been received, then that would be lying. Which is significantly inadvisable in legal contexts. I note your wording 'that the landlord needs to prove you received it', but feel that this is flying too close to legally denying the truth. 

What happens, for example, if the tenant says 'you need to prove I received it' and the landlord asks (in writing, our court) 'did you receive it?'

Nobody is currently being cross-examined on oath about it. It's perfectly normal and acceptable legal advice not to unnecessarily admit receipt of a notice.

Don't tell him your name, Pike!

PM me his name.

RHemmings

user1977 said:

RHemmings said:

user1977 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

RHemmings said:

Halabala9 said:

Edit:

https://www.familylaw.co.uk/news_and_comment/service-by-whatsapp

That seems like a totally different situation. They rather didn't have any agreement signed that specifically mentioned methods of notices. 

In your situation you have the clause in the contract. Hence, you could easily wait a while and then reply to your landlord pointing out that the contract specifies notices sent through the post and that you are waiting for a notice delivered in that way before you consider the notice to be valid. Legally that may or may not hold, but you can do it and the most likely result is that the landlord will re-issue the notice. 

It won't hold, because as noted previously the contract doesn't specify notices by post, but the landlord won't know that so it would be a decent delaying tactic.

Also, acknowledging that you have received a notice would somewhat hamper your ability to later argue that the landlord needs to prove you received it...

The notice has been received. If the OP were to try to argue that it hasn't been received, then that would be lying. Which is significantly inadvisable in legal contexts. I note your wording 'that the landlord needs to prove you received it', but feel that this is flying too close to legally denying the truth. 

What happens, for example, if the tenant says 'you need to prove I received it' and the landlord asks (in writing, our court) 'did you receive it?'

Nobody is currently being cross-examined on oath about it. It's perfectly normal and acceptable legal advice not to unnecessarily admit receipt of a notice.

As per my post, I can't see how that would benefit the OP here at all. The landlord will consider the notice served. Unless the OP is prepared to deny receipt, I can't see the benefit. 

The OP wants a delay. Hence, if asking for the notice to be sent by the post achieves the delay they want, then there is a reason to request that.