Do we really need to get a tenancy agreement witnessed?

3plus1

I viewed a flat yesterday, and I've decided I want to rent it with my partner.

The landlord is keen to avoid using a solicitor if at all possible, because of the cost. I have found a model AST agreement on the Edinburgh council website (found that link from Shelter Scotland) that I believe would be sufficient, if we just filled in the blanks...

How important is it that we actually get this contract witnessed? Could OH sign his bit, post it up to me, and then I could arrange for the landlord and I to sign at a suitable time for the two of us? The standard Scots AST I downloaded has space for one witness per party to the contract.

(OH lives 300 miles away - we're relocating, hence the flat hunting.)

The landlord doesn't really care about having a contract as long as we're "both honest", but we just want something to cover our backs. If we don't get it witnessed, will that defeat the whole point of the contract?

(By the way, he will be happy to sign a contract we produce, to put our minds at rest. He's just looking to cut down on costs after I negotiated him down on rent... He's not as dodgy as he sounds.)

Thanks for any advice!

yogi3

Private landlords letting property in Scotland must be registered unless all the properties they let are exempt.

A Short Assured Tenancy must be for at least 6 months initially and before the tenancy begins, the landlord must give the tenant a signed notice (Form AT5 ) stating that the tenancy is a Short Assured Tenancy and also written information about the effect of the Repairing Standard provisions of the Housing (Scotland) Act 2006 on the tenancy.

No witness legally required.

landlord sounds very dodgy

HugoSP

I would have an AST whether the LL cares or not as it give you rights as well as him. Besides an unwritten tenancy agreement defaults to an AST under law anyway, but having one in writing prevents any misunderstanding.

To that end both signatures should be witnessed. Your OH can get his witnessed then send it to you to sign and get yours witnessed. The AST could become invalid if it is not.

I can't tell from sure from what you wrote, but the fact that your LL is not insisting on as AST probably means that he is not experienced in letting. Whilst he probably has a good heart he may not fully understand his responsibilities, such as landlords gas certificates etc.

Has it been his place of residence until now?

My advice would be to consider this and take the flat, but realise that you could have problems, not from sharp practices but from a lack of understanding about what his legal duties both before and during the tenancy. You may find you need to 'hold his hand' through difficult patches.

One possible scenario is that he decides he needs the place back and doesn't realise that you have a minimum of 6 months from when you start the AST. However if you only need it for a few months and want to surrender the AST early this could work in your favour.

Has he asked for a deposit? If he has then direct him to this site.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TenancyDeposit/index.htm

I use the custodial based scheme to lodge my tenant's deposit with. We have 4 tenants, but only one of their ASTs started after this became law, so we paid her deposit into the Deposit Protection Service - website below:

http://www.depositprotection.com/

For small landlords IMO this represents the best option as it is free, the running costs are funded by some of the interest earned by the deposit.

All the best.

HugoSP

yogi3 wrote: »

landlord sounds very dodgy

Not having any lets in Scotland I didn't know about the rules and regulations up there, however I wouldn't agree with your statement that I have quoted.

I still maintain that it is more likely that the landlord is basically naive (spelling?) about letting. It could be his own pad that he doesn't need for whatever reason.

From time to time the tenants may have to carefully explain what his responsibiliies are when situations arise.

3plus1

The landlord does have two other properties, but it's more a case of him being naive than trying to pull a fast one. I think he's only very recently started to manage his properties himself, rather than going through a letting agency.

So, OH can get his signature witnessed on his end, have that signed and sent up, and that's all legal? The other two parties (the landlord and myself) don't have to see OH sign? That would be immensely helpful.

I've considered the pros and cons, but to be honest, I think if we can tell the landlord what needs doing in the event of something breaking down, he will get that sorted. I'm happy to go along with his vagueness, but I do want a proper contract, even if it's just a basic one.

He said he didn't really want to get a proper inventory drawn up, but to be honest, I think that hurts him far more than it hurts me!

HugoSP

3plus1 wrote: »

He said he didn't really want to get a proper inventory drawn up, but to be honest, I think that hurts him far more than it hurts me!

I would draw one up anyway and get him to sign it with you.

After all you don't want him to feel he's been had when he may not have been, if something he thinks is his disappears.

If you need to rent again you will need him as a referee. Any misunderstandings can cloud the issue.

kunekune

My worry would be this. If the landlord has recently got rid of the letting agency and is trying to save costs, and also would actually prefer an 'informal' tenancy rather than an AST, he may be in financial trouble. If he is that close to the bone, then you could end up homeless.

HugoSP

He has 3 properties. He hasn't said that he doesn't want an AST but he just doesn't want to pay for one.

When the OP can download them for nothing, who can blame him?

The LL may be reviewing costs in light of his increased mortgage payments. His focus on costs sounds perfectly reasonable to me. However I would advise the LL to gem up on the letting requirements he needs to adhere to.

3plus1

In response to what everyone's asked...

He lives in the suburbs and commutes to the city centre, where he works, and where he owns these three flats. (You can get a decent house for your money in the suburbs, but you basically have to live in a flat if you want to be in the centre. So that's understandable.)

As far as I know, the rules about protecting a deposit are only coming into force in England and Wales.

The entire building has no gas, so there's no obligation to have that checked each year. (It's usual for these type of older stone buildings to not be plumbed up for gas in this part of the world.)

He is a registered landlord, so he's not breaking any laws as far as that's concerned.

I did have a chat with him about his other properties and how much he's making on them and all of that (which to be honest, I don't think he should have admited to!) and although he is running a wee bit "close to the bone", I do think it's all perfectly manageable. At the end of the day, the flats are an investment for his pension and for his kids when he dies, and because he does have a decent full time job, if he does end up making a wee loss because the mortgages suddenly get hiked up, I think he would be comfortably able to take it on the chin.

I'm not worried about getting out, I just want to make sure that the basic legal bits are done by the book.

chappers

Get a contract drawn up and get adecent one even if he doesn't want to take any legal advice on the contract you use ,then you really should, you don't want him saying in 3 months time he has changed his mind and wants you out or that he wants to double the rent, you say he doesn't sound dodgy but you don't know him from Adam( apparently Harold Shipman was avery charming man).
If he won't draw up an inventory do it yourself and be detailed with any marks or damage(include photos if necessary)this is very important if he is taking a deposit from you, not sure if it applies in Scotland but if it does , then make sure it is deposited in a recognised scheme.
If he is unwilling to do these things then i wouldn't really want him as alandlord.