Can a landlord refuse to let a tenant move?

playlister82

I am currently renting privately on my own, for a number of reasons I have decided I will need to move in a few month's time. My contract runs for a year and has a mutual break clause in the middle, the earliest this can be applied therefore being in a few months from now.

My question is whether a landlord can choose to be difficult about allowing their tenant to move out early - I suspect that mine isn't expecting me to move any time soon and we haven't discussed it yet. I am wondering whether a landlord can "refuse" to let a tenant leave early, and not provide them with a reference for the next landlord as is commonly requested these days.

I'm aware that the existence of a mutual break clause provides some safety for both parties in this instance. But because I worry about such things I am just wanting to find out what the legalities might be, and if a tenant has any recourse should the landlord not "agree" to the mutual break (i.e. can a tenant unilaterally decide to break the contract in the middle, or does it have to be mutually agreed)?

Tabieth

What exactly does your contract say about the break clause? I’m no legal expert (very far from it!) but that's the starting point. If either party can decide to invoke the break clause I can’t foresee an issue. 

As for references, you have a right to see them so any reference provided is almost certainly going to be factual and objective. So, “XX’s tenancy started and finished on XXX dates, the rent was paid in full on time, the property was left in a satisfactory condition”. That sort of thing. 

gazfocus

As above, it really depends on the wording in the break clause so if you can post that (word for word) that would be really helpful.  

As for the reference, as long as you’ve been paying your rent on time, kept the property in good condition and are leaving within the terms of your tenancy, the landlord would have no grounds to not give a reference although you could always give the details of your previous landlord (if you have one) and use them for a reference instead. 

As a landlord myself, I actually prefer to have the reference from a previous landlord and not a current landlord - call me cynic but if a current landlord is having issues with a tenant, they potentially could give a good reference just to get rid of them. A previous landlord has nothing to gain so far more likely to give an honest reference. 

theartfullodger

Yes, we need EXACT wording of these clauses.

But a tenant can move out whenever they like - e.g. on the 2nd day of a 3 year contract if they wish: But are likely to remain liable for rent and other bills.

EXACT wording please.  Many landlords and agents get wording of break clauses wrong ...

playlister82

theartfullodger said:

Yes, we need EXACT wording of these clauses.

But a tenant can move out whenever they like - e.g. on the 2nd day of a 3 year contract if they wish: But are likely to remain liable for rent and other bills.

EXACT wording please.  Many landlords and agents get wording of break clauses wrong ...

My break clause says “Term of rental 12 months but subject to a mutual break clause at 6 months from the commencement of the tenancy.”

user1977

"Mutual" here means either party can exercise it. It wouldn't make any sense if both parties had to agree, because they could do that any time they wanted anyway. 

Hoenir

user1977 said:

"Mutual" here means either party can exercise it. It wouldn't make any sense if both parties had to agree, because they could do that any time they wanted anyway. 

That's not my understanding of the word. 

user1977

Hoenir said:

user1977 said:

"Mutual" here means either party can exercise it. It wouldn't make any sense if both parties had to agree, because they could do that any time they wanted anyway. 

That's not my understanding of the word. 

It's always what it means in this context. The whole point of a break clause is that one party can exercise it against the other. 

Bookworm105

playlister82 said:

theartfullodger said:

Yes, we need EXACT wording of these clauses.

But a tenant can move out whenever they like - e.g. on the 2nd day of a 3 year contract if they wish: But are likely to remain liable for rent and other bills.

EXACT wording please.  Many landlords and agents get wording of break clauses wrong ...

My break clause says “Term of rental 12 months but subject to a mutual break clause at 6 months from the commencement of the tenancy.”

very woolly wording

so you can leave at precisely 6 months from the start date?
you cannot leave at anytime after 6 months?

there is no reference to the notice period when exercising the break. If that wording is all its sys then literally it allows you , or the LL, to walk out without any forewarning on the 6th month date, but not 1 minute more or less either side of that date. 

Court would never uphold that wording.

playlister82

Bookworm105 said:

very woolly wording

so you can leave at precisely 6 months from the start date?
you cannot leave at anytime after 6 months?

there is no reference to the notice period when exercising the break. If that wording is all its sys then literally it allows you , or the LL, to walk out without any forewarning on the 6th month date, but not 1 minute more or less either side of that date. 

Court would never uphold that wording.

There's a clause later in the contract that says I'd need to give one month notice before leaving. I don't think my landlord would randomly decide to break the contract on the 6 month date, nor would I.

I have read online that sometimes break clauses are only usable on a certain date. I'm not as concerned about it having to be on a certain date, as I am about whether a landlord could refuse to allow a tenant to leave. I guess my question really is how "mutual" does it have to be. The poster above has largely answered this. I wonder if a landlord can just say "no", and what would a court response be if they did this.

gazfocus

playlister82 said:

Bookworm105 said:

very woolly wording

so you can leave at precisely 6 months from the start date?
you cannot leave at anytime after 6 months?

there is no reference to the notice period when exercising the break. If that wording is all its sys then literally it allows you , or the LL, to walk out without any forewarning on the 6th month date, but not 1 minute more or less either side of that date. 

Court would never uphold that wording.

There's a clause later in the contract that says I'd need to give one month notice before leaving. I don't think my landlord would randomly decide to break the contract on the 6 month date, nor would I.

I have read online that sometimes break clauses are only usable on a certain date. I'm not as concerned about it having to be on a certain date, as I am about whether a landlord could refuse to allow a tenant to leave. I guess my question really is how "mutual" does it have to be. The poster above has largely answered this. I wonder if a landlord can just say "no", and what would a court response be if they did this.

I guess that depends on the landlords understanding of the term he’s written in his tenancy agreement. As has been said above, the term ‘mutual break clause’ in contract speak means that either one of you can invoke the break clause, and doesn’t mean you both have to ‘agree’.  

My suggestion would always be to give the landlord as much notice as you possibly can. You’ll be doing them a massive favour so they can remarket the property sooner and have a lesser void between you moving out and a new tenant moving in.