A Tenant's guide to renting

MissMoneypenny

newname wrote: »

Started fixed term tenancy on april 1, 2007 which then expired after six months.

Sorry newname, this isn't going to help you because of the date of your tenancy, but I thought I would put it in this sticky as might help someone else reading it.
From nearly legal's blog

"Moreover, any s.21 Notice signed at the beginning of the tenancy, or with the tenancy agreement (as very many are) is invalid, as the deposit is not (yet) held in compliance with the scheme and the requisite information not (yet) provided to the tenant.

Sadly this only applies to deposits paid after 6 April, so older tenancies, even where renewed after that date, will not fall under it unless a fresh deposit is paid."
http://nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/index.php?s=shorthold

franklee

newname wrote: »

I did ring the shelter help line yesterday but may ring them again. The lady I spoke did advise me to inform them that I never got a copy of something I signed. She also said though if I haven't got a copy myself than I haven't been served notice.

Which left me afterwards thinking well do I want a copy then? However as I countersigned the documents presented to me I imagine that might suffice as evidence that I had seen the thing. But I think I will seek some more legal advice before I write to the landlord.

While she is technically right would you be believed? It's the oldest trick in the book for a tenant to deny notice has been served. The landlord can just say you did get to retain the S21 and he has the proof of the signed copy that it was served. If you write now and make clear you didn't get a copy to retain you are more likely to be believed than complaining for the first time in court.

prudryden

Perhaps, schedule 2, part 1, ground 6 may be more relevant in this case.
Housing Act 1988

newname_3

I haven't had a chance to ring for more advice yet. I've just googled

schedule 2, part 1, ground 6
Housing Act 1988

I note your perhaps. Is this suggesting that a court order has to be obtained anyway because of the redevelopment and as such wouldn't affect my references? On an assured shorthold tenancy?

I appreciate I would need to get this clarified from a legal source.

newname_3

I do feel really upset by all this. I'm thinking SOD sounds so commonplace that it will probably happen in my next tenancy and I will feel really insecure. I'm on Housing Association/Council lists for suitable accommodation but of course they are like gold dust.

franklee

newname wrote: »

I do feel really upset by all this. I'm thinking SOD sounds so commonplace that it will probably happen in my next tenancy and I will feel really insecure. I'm on Housing Association/Council lists for suitable accommodation but of course they are like gold dust.

If it's any consolation the SoD has been noticed and there was an attempt to stop it in some proposed new legalisation that was to overhaul renting but it never got anywhere and the whole thing is now shelved as far as I know.

A summary is here:

http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/docs/lc297_summary.pdf

See page 6,

section 1.33:

We also adopt the principle of “use it or lose it”; if a notice is not followed up by action within a defined period of time, it becomes ineffective.

section 1.34:

We recommend a number of detailed changes to the law relating to possession notices.

(1) Under the principle of "use it or lose it", if the possession notice is not followed up by actual proceedings within six months, the notice lapses. (The period is four months where possession is sought on the notice-only ground.) Contract-holders should not be kept in a state of uncertainty for unreasonably long periods.

You are definitely right to seek professional advice but I think if you wrote a letter detailing what happened:

Date the letter.

Dear landlord,

When I met you on xx date two days before the start of my tenancy you handed me a paper to sign, you kept the paper and promised to send me a copy later on. As I never received the copy I am writing now to ask for one. At the time you explained to me that the paper was for you to be able to evict me immediately if I didn't pay the rent.

With thanks,

newname.

What this does is:

1. Ask for a copy of the document.

2. State your side of events in writing.

3. Prove the S21 is invalid on three counts:

a) It was served before the tenancy started. (Slightly complicated by when you were given the keys, but that was definitely after you signed the paper, right , I doubt the landlord would part with keys till you'd signed all he wished to or you could refuse to sign )

b) It was incorrectly served as you did not get to retain the notice.

c) It was not unequivocal and without reservation as it was explained to you that actioning the notice was conditional on your non-payment of rent.

I think that would put you in the clear . His posting you a copy of the old notice would not count as being served a valid S21 now as it would have an old date on. He could just serve you a brand new valid S21 but then you would know you have two months notice to leave and he could do that anyway. At least then you'd know you have to move and will have time to arrange it.

As for how common the SoD is, it's well known by agents and landlords and comes up fairly often here. Tenants don't seem that aware of it. I've not had one yet I'd be mad as hell if I did.

newname_3

Thanks franklee that's a very helpful post.

I think it may have been two pieces of paper - I'm struggling to remember. Do you think I could write ......".one or two papers to sign......you promised to send me a copy/copies later on..."?

franklee

newname wrote: »

Thanks franklee that's a very helpful post.

I think it may have been two pieces of paper - I'm struggling to remember. Do you think I could write ......".one or two papers to sign......you promised to send me a copy/copies later on..."?

I think papers is fine or I suppose you could say notice if you think it was a S21. Or document. How many times did you sign? If once you could say paper.

An S21 would typically be one sheet but the tenant is often given two the same, one to sign and return and one to keep. That way both landlord and tenant get a signed copy. The landlord doesn't need the tenant's signature for it to be valid, he just needs to word and date it right and serve it correctly but landlords like a copy signed by the tenant to help show what happened.

If you think it was an S21 then I say notice as a section S21 is a notice requiring possession. There is no prescribed format but it typically looks something like this:

http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/pdf/Section21Notice.pdf

Say whatever you think describes it best.

I assume this is a seperate document to the tenancy agreement and that you have got that? I also assume you dated all your signatures otherwise the landlord could tweak the date

clutton_2

Franklee is back on his hobby horse of Section 21 protocols - everything he writes about S21 is what he WISHES were law - not what is actually law ........

talk to Shelter - they really are the experts

""http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/docs/lc297_summary.pdf"" - is a REPORT which Franklee quotes over and over again and it is only offering reccommendations - it is NOT law

franklee

clutton wrote: »

Franklee is back on his hobby horse of Section 21 protocols - everything he writes about S21 is what he WISHES were law - not what is actually law ........

talk to Shelter - they really are the experts

Hi clutton,

newname has been talking to the shelter help line.

Do you still serve a SoD S21? If so I am still curious how on the one hand your tenants on a periodic tenancy know you want them to stay for a long time and on the other hand you served them a S21 early in the tenancy (to expire at the end of the fixed term) and kept the S21 valid.

It's quite amusing what landlords say to deflect the tenant from realising what's going on. One landlord wrote here that they told tenants it was "for insurance purposes" but I forget who. The agent littlesaint rented from told her it was to "stop the squatter problem" IIRC.

It seems they say anything except that it's to avoid the landlord having to wait the two months for the S21 to expire when they later on decide they wish the tenant to leave. I take it you do agree that it speeds the process up as this post indicates:

clutton wrote: »

yes, i do issue section 21s as part of my tenancy agreement, and i know you dont like that idea. All my tenants have been with me for a long time, and they know that they have a home for life as long as they dont mess me about - i'm in this business for the long haul.

But, on the rare occasion when you do need to get a "tenant-gone-bad" out - it does make it easier to have served a Section 21. One of my landlord's tenants, who started to act very unsociably, soon stopped when i explained the full implications of the Section 21 - she did not realise how quickly i could have had her out had i chosen to do so.

The only tenant i ever had to verbally persuade to leave (rather than me take her to court) was causing so much mayhem and noise in the street, that the local community would have been outraged had i had to wait another two months before issuing proceedings.

i think you have to take each situation individually.

I guess landlords don't like tenants realising what's going on as then it's less effective as the tenant can ask for it to be changed, determine if the notice was invalid, or even just comply with the S21 and leave when it suits, after the S21 expires, without having to give notice themselves