What if i wish to break out of an Assured shorthold tennancy

dannim12345

Could you rent an airbnb (or hotel) for the length of the job?  Or just to begin while you decide if it’s worth renting a place? 

faringdon

Well yes, thanks, you have a good point there....i once relocated for a job...took out a 6 month AST, and in the first week, found out that the company i'd come to was just a "token" electronics company. They just "pretend" to do Electronics Engineering, the real business of the company was a secret, "behind the scenes", (out of sight) Chinese electronics importation business. Found this out just after signing up for the 6 month AST !

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/a-new-type-of-electronics-degree-course/

saajan_12

faringdon said:

When  I was a lad......40+ years ago....rental properties were always administered by

"letting agencies", and all the transfer of bills and viewing of rooms etc was just their normal

"bread and butter"...no drama.

..
If a landlord finds viewings and bills a problem or a pain..then time to sell  up the property

and get out....save yourself the stress.

..

But just clearing off when you were payed up in rent...

that never used to bother anyone. -they just got someone else in....kept the deposit and pre-payed rent.
"Admin" of getting a new tennant?...that was just their "bread and butter"...no bother.

What does something being 'bread and butter' have to do with charging for your time? Eg a plumber's bread and butter is their time in going to jobs, fixing pipework, etc. If you contracted with them to fix a bathroom in one house, and once they started said acutally sorry please fix the bathroom in another house instead, they would charge for the extra call out / travel. Its not a bother, but it is time which they hadn't agreed to spend. 

faringdon

Thanks,  though the landlord  keeping the deposit and the pre-payed rent would generally pay for the cost of re-entering of a new tennant to replace the runaway tennant...and if the property had been  empty when that runaway  tennant had first moved in to it...then the landlord is in no worse financial position then they were at that tennant's move in date anyway....just that the landlord is  a good few quid richer!....and if it was permitted to break out of AST's, then that landlord would stand more chance of getting a new   tennant in.
___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

Anyway, after one  signs for a 6 month AST, is there a "cooling off" period, within which its actually legal for the tennant to quit the AST?.....Albeit with the tennant loosing any moneys that they payed already. For example...if a tennant signs a 6 month AST....then quits it after 2 weeks, is that allowed because its within 2 weeks?

Tabieth

faringdon said:

Thanks,  though the landlord  keeping the deposit and the pre-payed rent would generally pay for the cost of re-entering of a new tennant to replace the runaway tennant...and if the property had been  empty when that runaway  tennant had first moved in to it...then the landlord is in no worse financial position then they were at that tennant's move in date anyway....just that the landlord is  a good few quid richer!....and if it was permitted to break out of AST's, then that landlord would stand more chance of getting a new   tennant in.
___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

Anyway, after one  signs for a 6 month AST, is there a "cooling off" period, within which it’s actually legal for the tennant to quit the AST?.....Albeit with the tennant loosing any moneys that they payed already. For example...if a tennant signs a 6 month AST....then quits it after 2 weeks, is that allowed because it’s within 2 weeks?

If there’s a cooling off period, it will be clearly stated in the contract. There’s no magic time period where one can just break a contractual agreement without penalty. 

Alderbank

faringdon said:

Thanks,  though the landlord  keeping the deposit and the pre-payed rent would generally pay for the cost of re-entering of a new tennant to replace the runaway tennant...and if the property had been  empty when that runaway  tennant had first moved in to it...then the landlord is in no worse financial position then they were at that tennant's move in date anyway....just that the landlord is  a good few quid richer!....and if it was permitted to break out of AST's, then that landlord would stand more chance of getting a new   tennant in.
___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

Anyway, after one  signs for a 6 month AST, is there a "cooling off" period, within which its actually legal for the tennant to quit the AST?.....Albeit with the tennant loosing any moneys that they payed already. For example...if a tennant signs a 6 month AST....then quits it after 2 weeks, is that allowed because its within 2 weeks?

There are two types of AST - fixed term or periodic.

Fixed term ASTs are by far the most popular because they give both tenant and landlord some security. Fixed term ASTs must be a minimum of 6 months.

Periodic ASTs from the start are weekly, monthly or 3-monthly etc, depending on what the agreement says. To end a periodic tenancy you must by law give one clear tenancy period's notice in writing. This is usually one month (rent paid monthly) or a minimum of 28 days when the rent is paid weekly.

So after one signs for a 6 month AST, if it is a fixed term tenancy you have committed to at least 6 months.
A 6 month AST which is a periodic tenancy, also you have committed to at least 6 months.
A 1 week or 1 month periodic AST, you need only give 1 months notice (ending on the last day of the tenancy period).

@faringdon, it sounds like 6 month tenancies are not right for you and you would be better off with 1 week or 1 month periodic tenancies instead.

faringdon

QUOTE
it sounds like 6 month tenancies are not right for you and you would be better off with 1 week or 1 month periodic tenancies instead.
UNQUOTE
Thanks but for the cheap flats its either 6 or 12 month AST....nothing else is ever offered.

saajan_12

faringdon said:

Thanks,  though the landlord  keeping the deposit and the pre-payed rent would generally pay for the cost of re-entering of a new tennant to replace the runaway tennant...and if the property had been  empty when that runaway  tennant had first moved in to it...then the landlord is in no worse financial position then they were at that tennant's move in date anyway....just that the landlord is  a good few quid richer!....and if it was permitted to break out of AST's, then that landlord would stand more chance of getting a new   tennant in.

Not always unless there's a long period eg 6 months prepaid, in which case the tenant is less likely to want to bolt with nothing back. Plus much of the pre-paid rent could be eaten up by the LL not knowing the tenant has left - they can't watch the comings and goings daily and have to allow 'quiet enjoyment'. 

Of course they are in a worse position, at the tenants move in date they had already completed the advertising, viewings, referencing, inventorying, etc which all now has to be repeated. Also even if the property is popular, most good tenants need to give a months notice so can't move in immediately. 


Hot take: why don't we sign agreemetns that actually suit and then abide by them. If you want a short let to try it out, then those are available - usually at a higher rent for this very reason, that its not profitable to keep having changeovers otherwise! 

Myci85

Sounds like you'd be better off doing air bnb or something when you relocate for a job, to give you time to test out the job prospects before committing to a legally binding tenancy. Your current attitude seems to be to do whatever suits you without a care for the impact this has on others, and then feel justified in your actions because you feel that's how it should be. 

faringdon

thanks...it all depends on the actual cost of "viewing, referencing and inventorying".....i doubt this is much more than the cost gained by keeping the tennants deposit and pre-payed rent........the cost of "viewing, referencing and inventorying" is unlikley to be  more than two months rent.....and likely to  be less than one months rent as these things are done usually be inventorying companies and viewing staff at estate agents, etc.

The certain thing is that nobody likes moving flats...so the runaway is obviously caught in a bad situation when doing it, and doesnt welcome it.....it will obviosly be a very low occurring  situation since most people work in jobs which are stable, and dont flit off and break AST..........and the bottom line is that if people  were allowed to breakout of AST and loose their deposit and pre-payed rent then landlords will find it  even easier to find new tennants.....there is massive shortage of cheap flats in the UK at the moment....so its unlikely it would be on the rental market for long.

I moved into a rental  place which deffo smelled of stale urine when i moved in....but i still took  it because i knew that if i did not,  it would be gone. I guess the urine is kind of embedded into the room carpet. I had to hire a vac-washer to clean the carpet at first, those things that kind of blow steam into the carpet then suck it back out,  but the smell is still there.

Seriously in most places i go its rare for a cheap flat to be on the market for more than a week, unless its a rich landlord who is just being extremely discerning about who they eventually let it out to.

As discussed,  "in the old days", letting flats was not considered a profittable thing, just another job, and letting agencies used to do it  with great ease, and didnt struggle with inventorying etc etc.....they took all this in their stride...the problem now is that buy-to-let properties are in the hands of people who have a different full-time  day job, and simply expect the buy-to-let property be an eternal good money returner. They look upon it as an investment, rather than a  plain "day-job".   This is not how it used to be.

..and in the old days, property prices didnt move much...nowadays people expect the property prices to skyrocket and so people who simply havent the time for buy-to-letting (due to their other full time job) have come into the buy-to-let world......they want property as they suspect the massive property market gains of 1998 to 2003 will happen again.......and then of course, such people simply dont have the time for the buy-to-let admin.