Separation - need to leave a joint tenancy!

_Penny_Dreadful

ThisIsWeird said:

_Penny_Dreadful said:

Hills456 said:

Thank you for all responses - I have been upfront and honest with the landlord regarding the situation as I always think that is best policy. LL is currently looking at options he has but he said a joint agreement with ex to end the lease would be the better than eviction, which we know.
I emailed ex yesterday giving him until next Monday to agree to end the lease with me, and then I'd be happy to pay my current share of the rent until a new tenant is found. I said this would be preferable to everyone but if he does decide to stay in the property which we all know is not affordable to him, I will need to default on my own payments. Ex in response said that he thought I was incriminating myself and that he doesn't think that's the right route - so I hold out little hope of an agreement as he will probably try to use my defaults on payments against me at some point.
Seemingly, under the tenancy agreement, the easiest way for LL to start eviction is for 14 days' outstanding rent as it doesn't contain a break clause so LL can't end it himself with s.21.
This was the best I could do. 

14 days outstanding rent would not be the easiest way for the landlord. That would require a Section 8 notice using ground 10 which is a discretionary ground. No sane landlord walks into court hoping to get a possession order with just a discretionary ground. For arrears a landlord would wait until at least 2 months worth of arrears (8 weeks if rent is paid weekly) is owed so ground 8 could be used which is a mandatory ground for eviction. Your ex could easily scupper a Section 8 with ground 8 by paying off just enough arrears to keep the amount owed under 2 months/8 weeks. 

The sticky at the top of the board about Tenancies in England explains how and when an AST can be ended. 

A sane LL could presumably walk into court requesting an S8 - if armed with evidence from one tenant that this ain't a temporary situation they can work through. 
I don't know how these things work in practice, but I presume an adjudicator decides if the LL is being fair and reasonable in each case. 
"Here's a letter from one of my tenants, m'lud. It says "can't pay, won't pay, throw me out""

You don’t say. 

When using a discretionary ground the court must decide if the landlord has proven that the conditions for the ground are met, and it is just and reasonable to evict the tenant. I don’t see that happening with 14 days of arrears following a relationship breakdown. It also leaves the landlord further out of pocket on court costs which is why a sane landlord would wait until a mandatory ground for eviction can be used. 

Hills456

_Penny_Dreadful said:

ThisIsWeird said:

_Penny_Dreadful said:

Hills456 said:

Thank you for all responses - I have been upfront and honest with the landlord regarding the situation as I always think that is best policy. LL is currently looking at options he has but he said a joint agreement with ex to end the lease would be the better than eviction, which we know.
I emailed ex yesterday giving him until next Monday to agree to end the lease with me, and then I'd be happy to pay my current share of the rent until a new tenant is found. I said this would be preferable to everyone but if he does decide to stay in the property which we all know is not affordable to him, I will need to default on my own payments. Ex in response said that he thought I was incriminating myself and that he doesn't think that's the right route - so I hold out little hope of an agreement as he will probably try to use my defaults on payments against me at some point.
Seemingly, under the tenancy agreement, the easiest way for LL to start eviction is for 14 days' outstanding rent as it doesn't contain a break clause so LL can't end it himself with s.21.
This was the best I could do. 

14 days outstanding rent would not be the easiest way for the landlord. That would require a Section 8 notice using ground 10 which is a discretionary ground. No sane landlord walks into court hoping to get a possession order with just a discretionary ground. For arrears a landlord would wait until at least 2 months worth of arrears (8 weeks if rent is paid weekly) is owed so ground 8 could be used which is a mandatory ground for eviction. Your ex could easily scupper a Section 8 with ground 8 by paying off just enough arrears to keep the amount owed under 2 months/8 weeks. 

The sticky at the top of the board about Tenancies in England explains how and when an AST can be ended. 

A sane LL could presumably walk into court requesting an S8 - if armed with evidence from one tenant that this ain't a temporary situation they can work through. 
I don't know how these things work in practice, but I presume an adjudicator decides if the LL is being fair and reasonable in each case. 
"Here's a letter from one of my tenants, m'lud. It says "can't pay, won't pay, throw me out""

You don’t say. 

When using a discretionary ground the court must decide if the landlord has proven that the conditions for the ground are met, and it is just and reasonable to evict the tenant. I don’t see that happening with 14 days of arrears following a relationship breakdown. It also leaves the landlord further out of pocket on court costs which is why a sane landlord would wait until a mandatory ground for eviction can be used. 

What would be a mandatory ground for eviction? I thought rent arrears would be an obvious one? And 14 days arrears is one of them in the tenancy agreement 

doodling

Hi,

Hills456 said:

_Penny_Dreadful said:

ThisIsWeird said:

_Penny_Dreadful said:

Hills456 said:

Thank you for all responses - I have been upfront and honest with the landlord regarding the situation as I always think that is best policy. LL is currently looking at options he has but he said a joint agreement with ex to end the lease would be the better than eviction, which we know.
I emailed ex yesterday giving him until next Monday to agree to end the lease with me, and then I'd be happy to pay my current share of the rent until a new tenant is found. I said this would be preferable to everyone but if he does decide to stay in the property which we all know is not affordable to him, I will need to default on my own payments. Ex in response said that he thought I was incriminating myself and that he doesn't think that's the right route - so I hold out little hope of an agreement as he will probably try to use my defaults on payments against me at some point.
Seemingly, under the tenancy agreement, the easiest way for LL to start eviction is for 14 days' outstanding rent as it doesn't contain a break clause so LL can't end it himself with s.21.
This was the best I could do. 

14 days outstanding rent would not be the easiest way for the landlord. That would require a Section 8 notice using ground 10 which is a discretionary ground. No sane landlord walks into court hoping to get a possession order with just a discretionary ground. For arrears a landlord would wait until at least 2 months worth of arrears (8 weeks if rent is paid weekly) is owed so ground 8 could be used which is a mandatory ground for eviction. Your ex could easily scupper a Section 8 with ground 8 by paying off just enough arrears to keep the amount owed under 2 months/8 weeks. 

The sticky at the top of the board about Tenancies in England explains how and when an AST can be ended. 

A sane LL could presumably walk into court requesting an S8 - if armed with evidence from one tenant that this ain't a temporary situation they can work through. 
I don't know how these things work in practice, but I presume an adjudicator decides if the LL is being fair and reasonable in each case. 
"Here's a letter from one of my tenants, m'lud. It says "can't pay, won't pay, throw me out""

You don’t say. 

When using a discretionary ground the court must decide if the landlord has proven that the conditions for the ground are met, and it is just and reasonable to evict the tenant. I don’t see that happening with 14 days of arrears following a relationship breakdown. It also leaves the landlord further out of pocket on court costs which is why a sane landlord would wait until a mandatory ground for eviction can be used. 

What would be a mandatory ground for eviction? I thought rent arrears would be an obvious one? And 14 days arrears is one of them in the tenancy agreement 

Two months is when arrears becomes a mandatory ground (assuming monthly rent).

If you don't pay and the ex continues to pay the same then it will take six months for two months arrears to accrue.

doodling

Hi,

kimwp said:

Olinda99 said:

yes, the solicitor could be right - if it came to.it you are liable for 50% until 2026 and potentially all of it if your ex doesn't pay

No. She and ex are jointly liable for 100% of the rent. There is no legal split.

I agree that that is the case so far as the relationship between the tenants and landlord is concerned.  The landlord can pursue either or both of the for the full amount.

So far as the relationship between the tenants is concerned then there is a long-standing agreement that the OP would pay one third and the ex pay two thirds.  It is likely that that agreement between the tenants could be enforced in court if one of the tenants decided to take legal action against the other.  It is unclear why the ex's solicitor thinks that separation changes that agreement - presumably they would have explained that in their letter.

Hills456

doodling said:

Hi,

kimwp said:

Olinda99 said:

yes, the solicitor could be right - if it came to.it you are liable for 50% until 2026 and potentially all of it if your ex doesn't pay

No. She and ex are jointly liable for 100% of the rent. There is no legal split.

I agree that that is the case so far as the relationship between the tenants and landlord is concerned.  The landlord can pursue either or both of the for the full amount.

So far as the relationship between the tenants is concerned then there is a long-standing agreement that the OP would pay one third and the ex pay two thirds.  It is likely that that agreement between the tenants could be enforced in court if one of the tenants decided to take legal action against the other.  It is unclear why the ex's solicitor thinks that separation changes that agreement - presumably they would have explained that in their letter.

No explanation in their letter - I presume just out of spite and ex’s request for the change. 

ThisIsWeird

Hills456 said:

doodling said:

Hi,

kimwp said:

Olinda99 said:

yes, the solicitor could be right - if it came to.it you are liable for 50% until 2026 and potentially all of it if your ex doesn't pay

No. She and ex are jointly liable for 100% of the rent. There is no legal split.

I agree that that is the case so far as the relationship between the tenants and landlord is concerned.  The landlord can pursue either or both of the for the full amount.

So far as the relationship between the tenants is concerned then there is a long-standing agreement that the OP would pay one third and the ex pay two thirds.  It is likely that that agreement between the tenants could be enforced in court if one of the tenants decided to take legal action against the other.  It is unclear why the ex's solicitor thinks that separation changes that agreement - presumably they would have explained that in their letter.

No explanation in their letter - I presume just out of spite and ex’s request for the change. 

Your ex's solicitor will do as they are bid, provided it's legal. Morals barely get a look-in.

Hopefully your solicitor is switched on, and once they make clear to the other side that (a) your contribution would remain only 1/3rd max, (b) it won't even be that since ex is not contributing to child-care costs, and (c) ex cannot maintain the rent on his own so will also default at some point, then perhaps, just perhaps, ex's solicitor will give proper guidance to his client.

Anyhoo, good luck, and please keep us posted.

isplumm

I have to say I am amazed at some of these responses - the OP has a contract until mid 2026 - which they cannot break without LL permission - they want to move and stop paying any rent at all - leaving the OP ex to pay all of it - which OP admits ex cannot afford - so my question is why should ex be forced to pay the full amount - they clearly don't want the relationship to end - seems to me that it is the ex that is getting screwed, not the OP?

ThisIsWeird

isplumm said:

I have to say I am amazed at some of these responses - the OP has a contract until mid 2026 - which they cannot break without LL permission - they want to move and stop paying any rent at all - leaving the OP ex to pay all of it - which OP admits ex cannot afford - so my question is why should ex be forced to pay the full amount - they clearly don't want the relationship to end - seems to me that it is the ex that is getting screwed, not the OP?

Yeah, fair do's.

The OP should keep paying her third, and the childcare costs, and keep shacked up with her mum, so that ex can live in this nice flat on his todsome, until 2026 at least, with an option to extend.

I'm amazed too.

hugheskevi

It might be worth considering what type of landlord this is (eg corporate ownership, landlord who owns and deals with all the details themselves, or a landlord managing through an estate agent and insurers, etc) although it seems all routes will lead to the same outcome as things stand.

I had a very similar issue with tenants a couple of years ago. One informed me they were leaving prior to any rent default, and clearly did not understand the joint and several nature of their tenancy agreement. Although I owned the property, I also had insurance policies against non-payment in place. Until there was a default I had far more options available in terms of what I could agree to, eg, a mutually agreed premature end to the contract, for example. As soon as a default occurred, I had to hand it over to the insurance company and they would deal with it.

A few things from my perspective as a landlord in that situation that might help:

• I am not a counselor, I could not care less about relationship details and 'he said' 'she said' etc. I have no desire to hear details, sort out what you want with the other party and what you are going to do or propose to me, and tell me. I appreciate being kept informed whilst deliberations are taking place, but only want the facts, no emotions, blame, etc.
• It is likely the other party is contacting the landlord with details about how unreasonable you are. If the LL has any sense he will stay well out of it beyond ensuring both parties are made aware of their contractual obligations and the consequences of any proposed actions (eg not paying rent, leaving early, etc).
• It is generally not in anyone's interest to force contractual terms that are inevitably going to break down. I would far prefer a voluntary early termination with no default over a fractious tenancy. I would have the cost of getting new tenants, but that is far smaller than the cost of months of lost rent and court proceedings that are in nobody's best interests. 
• As soon as a default happened, I would have no further contact with tenants and leave it to my insurer to resolve and they would be dealing with a corporate rather than a landlord. I would receive rent from the insurer to cover all unpaid rent, up to 12 months.

My tenants concluded it was best to see out their contract and there was no default during the contract, although I believe one side left several months prior to the expiry of their contract but continued to meet their rental obligations. 

_Penny_Dreadful

isplumm said:

I have to say I am amazed at some of these responses - the OP has a contract until mid 2026 - which they cannot break without LL permission - they want to move and stop paying any rent at all - leaving the OP ex to pay all of it - which OP admits ex cannot afford - so my question is why should ex be forced to pay the full amount - they clearly don't want the relationship to end - seems to me that it is the ex that is getting screwed, not the OP?

The landlord is willing to end the fixed term early providing all joint tenants agree to it. The relationship is over. The OP is moving out and will have their own living expenses to pay for. The ex is choosing not to end the fixed term early and to remain living in a property they cannot afford. Legally speaking each joint tenant has joint and several liability for paying the full rent so if the ex chooses to remain in occupation let them pay the full rent.