Notice Requiring Possession

hedgewytch13

Hello,
I hope someone can help. I recently moved into a rented property and received my tenancy agreement pack. At the end of this was a "Notice Requiring Possession" Date of expiry: 15th of June. I've never had one of these before and it scared me, as before I signed anything I asked for assurances that we would be able to rent long term and after 6 months if all is well, we can carry on and we won't be evicted for the landlord to put it on the market for example. I contacted the letting agents today and they said it's standard. I haven't seen one before. Is it standard? Apparently it's to protect the landlord in case we are bad tenants so they can immediately evict us at the end of out shorthold tenancy, but if all runs smoothly then it'll probably be renewed.
Has anyone else come across this or am I just getting myself into a state about nothing and it is standard practise? I've moved house twice last year and I can't bear to it again.

Muddyfingers

Yes, this is normal. Good landlords will honour any agreement to extend beyond the initial six months if you're good tenents. If you turn out to be nutters(!) and trash the place then the landlord can easily get rid of you after the six months. It just covers the landlord a bit.

Debt_Free_Chick

Yes, it's becoming more common but basically, the LL is telling you to get out on 15 June.

You'll have to wait until nearer the time to see if he changes his mind and offers to renew the tenancy. There's no guarantee that he will, so you need to raise this in April (early), to give you enough time to find another property, if you have to leave this one.

HugoSP

We don't do this, but there has been one instance where this would have been useful.

In the event we managed to issue a notice after 2 months of the tenancy as the tenant had paid NO rent. We sought and achieved possession 2 1/2 months after the AST started.

We were advised that this was the only exception to the 6 month minimum term on the AST - hence this minimum term is conditional on the rent being less than 2 months in arrears.

hedgewytch13

Thank you for your replies I would press the thanks button but mine isn't working.

Guy_Montag

Were you given details of the tenancy deposit scheme in which your deposit is being held in the tenancy pack?

If not the eviction notice may not be valid.

Either way it's a shitey way to treat people.

franklee

hedgewytch13 wrote: »

Has anyone else come across this or am I just getting myself into a state about nothing and it is standard practise? I've moved house twice last year and I can't bear to it again.

The nick name for it is the Sword of Damocles for obvious reasons :mad: as in my sig.

Basically they are saying unofficially that you can stay while the current paperwork officially says you can't. So that means you need to be on your toes to get new paperwork saying you can stay done in time so that if it falls through you still have time to arrange moving elsewhere.

It's also a nice earner for the agent as they'll be able to charge you a fat fee for the paperwork allowing you to stay and they'll probably repeat this every 6 to 12 months.

Guy_Montag wrote: »

Were you given details of the tenancy deposit scheme in which your deposit is being held in the tenancy pack?

If not the eviction notice may not be valid.

Either way it's a shitey way to treat people.

Shitey indeed! There is a good chance the notice is invalid but not many tenants know what to look for in that respect.

CYBERCIDERSAVER

So if you are served one of these things at the beginning of your 6 month AST then am I right in thinkng you would not have to give notice if you left at the end of the 6 months??:question:

If that's right then if I ever get served one I will do just that. Make noises like I wanna stay but the day that the 6 months ends, I'll be living somewhere else. Leaving LL no tenant for at least a month.:rotfl:

It is a !!!!!! way to treat people and more people should take a stand against it by either not renting houses with these stupid things attached or the above.

chocolatechipcookies

I highly doubt your LL is going to kick you out when your 6 months is up.

The Section 21 is to safeguard the property for really bad really horrible tenants who never pay their rent for example.

That's just a poor attitude, cyber, I hope you really aren't that childish. It's that type of attitude that makes LA have stupid rules.

chocolatechipcookies

franklee wrote: »

The nick name for it is the Sword of Damocles for obvious reasons :mad: as in my sig.

Basically they are saying unofficially that you can stay while the current paperwork officially says you can't. So that means you need to be on your toes to get new paperwork saying you can stay done in time so that if it falls through you still have time to arrange moving elsewhere.

It's also a nice earner for the agent as they'll be able to charge you a fat fee for the paperwork allowing you to stay and they'll probably repeat this every 6 to 12 months.



Shitey indeed! There is a good chance the notice is invalid but not many tenants know what to look for in that respect.

You don't HAVE to resign at all when your 6 months comes up. Of course you will pay an admin fee, paperwork takes time.

MissMoneypenny

franklee wrote: »

There is a good chance the notice is invalid but not many tenants know what to look for in that respect.

The legality of when a S21 can be served, was discussed in this thread
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=675601