10:01 AM, 23rd September 2024, About 3 months ago 30
Text Size
It’s every landlords worst nightmare, you do a property inspection or your trade arrives and low and behold the person living in the property is NOT the tenant.
Subletting is not an uncommon practice and can be a legally complex issue, particularly when it comes to the rights and responsibilities of both the original tenant, the occupant and the landlord.
Understanding Subletting and Its Legal Implications
Subletting involves the tenant (or “head tenant”) renting out the property or part of it to another individual, known as the subtenant. The original tenant remains legally responsible for fulfilling the terms of the tenancy agreement with the landlord, even if they are not residing at the property themselves.
In many cases the head tenant will issue the subtenant with an AST meaning the head tenant becomes the subtenants immediate legal landlord and therefore will be responsible for all the things a landlord is responsible for such as, Right to rent checks, providing compliance documents, protecting deposit etc…. – “have I lost you yet? No!, good”
Subletting is NOT illegal
It is a common misconception that subletting is illegal or prohibited as such this is a standard clause in most ASTs, many believe a tenant must get the landlords permission to sublet or risk losing their tenancy.
This is not the case, subletting under a fixed term tenancy is not illegal, but it may require the landlords consent to do so
In contrast, it is illegal for a council or housing association tenant to sublet their rental property without consent, this can result in a criminal conviction and any rent received by the head tenant being recovered
Key Provisions of the Housing Act 1988 on Subletting
The Housing Act 1988 is one of the key pieces of legislation that governs private tenancies in the England, including matters related to subletting.
It is not illegal or prohibited for a tenant to sublet when they have an active fixed term tenancy and any clause in an AST that states otherwise could be deemed unenforceable as contracts cannot override statute law.
Section 15 of the Housing Act 1988
This states that there is an implied term in statutory periodic tenancies ONLY that a tenant cannot sublet without the landlords consent, However, this implied term is not of effect in fixed term or contractual periodic tenancies.
For clarity – Statutory vs Contractual
In short a contractual periodic is one that arises at the end of the fixed term tenancy when the fixed term had a ‘continuation clause’ which reads something like “ This tenancy shall continue on the same terms month by month thereafter”
A statutory periodic is created when the fixed term ends and their was not continuation clause or the fixed term made it clear the periodic would be statutory.
If a tenant on a statutory periodic tenancy proceeds to sublet without permission, the landlord may seek possession of the property on the grounds that the tenant has breached the terms of the tenancy, potentially leading to eviction proceedings. This would be done via section 8 ground 12, the downside here is that ground 12 is discretionary meaning it would be up to the judge to decide if eviction was reasonable.
Common Subletting Risks
Subletting can introduce risks for landlords, such as:
How Landlords Can Prevent Subletting
To prevent subletting, landlords should take the following steps:
By understanding their legal rights and taking proactive measures, landlords can effectively manage and prevent unauthorised subletting, safeguarding their properties and tenancy agreements.
Previous Article
Angela Rayner wants to 'work in partnership' with PRS landlords
DPT
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up12:37 PM, 5th October 2024, About 2 months ago
Reply to the comment left by John Frith at 04/10/2024 - 13:25
This area of law is very nuanced. Small differences can make the sub-tenancy either valid or invalid. In the case of a prohibited sublet, the sub-tenancy would be invalid and the sub-tenant could be removed without a court order.
John Frith
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up13:31 PM, 5th October 2024, About 2 months ago
It was a few years ago - think on this board - but I can't find it now. And while a posting on this board doesn't necessarily count as expert opinion, I seem to remember it was from a regular poster who had some legal qualifications.
I myself have no legal qualifications, so I'm speculating here, but hypothetically, if a person in good faith enters into an AST, only to find their contract had been given without the required permission from their landlord, then don't both parties have a prima facia claim to have the law on their side, which would need to be sorted out in court?
Kizzie
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up13:35 PM, 5th October 2024, About 2 months ago
And may have to go as far as the Supreme Court to become statutory law
Michael Crofts
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up9:58 AM, 6th October 2024, About 2 months ago
Referring again to Notices to Quit, these will soon be a thing of the past. Hundreds of years, possibly more than a thousand years old, NTQs for residential tenancies will be made illegal if s.13 of the Renters Rights Bill (RRB) is enacted, as it will be, probably before the Christmas recess.
The relevant provision in RRB is this:
13 Other duties
In the [Housing Act 1988], after section 16D (inserted by section 12 of this Act) insert—
“16E Other duties
(1) A relevant person must not, in relation to an assured tenancy—......
(b) purport to bring the tenancy to an end by service of a notice to quit (see section 5(1))
The reference to s. 5(1) of the 1988 Act also relates to 5(1)(c) which gives the power to serve a Notice to Quit in fixed term tenancies in certain circumstances. The RRB of course abolishes fixed term tenancies and thus 5(1)(c) will become otiose; the final paragraph of 5(1) says 'accordingly, the service by the landlord of a notice to quit is of no effect in relation to a periodic assured tenancy' - and all assured tenancies (in effect all tenancies of dwelling houses occupied as principal homes, see s.1 of the 1988 Act) will be periodic.
The last two lines of s.19(3) of the RRB reinforce this.
DPT
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up13:40 PM, 6th October 2024, About 2 months ago
Reply to the comment left by John Frith at 05/10/2024 - 13:31I have queried this exact point with the housing lawyer David Smith and he gave me the information I have relayed here.
Tenants should be advised to check whether their landlord has consent to let the property from their superior landlord.
EDIT: I just checked and this is also covered on the How to Rent guide under subletting.
DPT
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up13:52 PM, 6th October 2024, About 2 months ago
Reply to the comment left by John Frith at 05/10/2024 - 13:31I have checked this exact point with the prominent housing lawyer David Smith. He confirmed the information I have relayed here.
A sub-tenant is strongly advised to check that the person purporting to be their landlord has consent to sub-let from their superior landlord.
Having just checked, I see that this is also covered in the How to Rent guide with the paragraph:
"If the landlord is not the property owner and ghey claim to be a tenant, a family member or a friend, be very cautious as it could be an unlawful sub-letting"
DPT
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up14:07 PM, 6th October 2024, About 2 months ago
Reply to the comment left by John Frith at 05/10/2024 - 13:31
I have checked this exact point with the housing lawyer, David Smith. He has confirmed the information I have relayed here.
A sub-tenant is strongly advised to check that the person purporting to be their landlord has consent to sub-let from their superior landlord.
Having just checked, I see that this is in part covered in the Government's How to Rent guide, which says:
"If the landlord is not the property owner and they claim to be a tenant, a family member or a friend, be very cautious as it could be an unlawful sub-letting"
DPT
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up14:17 PM, 6th October 2024, About 2 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Michael Crofts at 06/10/2024 - 09:58
I dont see how Notices to Quit will dissapear. They have never been of any legal effect in relation to a an Assured or Assured Shorthold tenancy. However, a landlord can now, and will post RRB be able to serve a valid NtQ if the tenancy becomes non-assured for any reason, such as the tenant no longer living there. Landlords of other types of non-assured tenancies will also continue to use NtQs to end tenancies, as will Tenants.
Michael Crofts
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up17:23 PM, 6th October 2024, About 2 months ago
Reply to the comment left by DPT at 06/10/2024 - 14:17
I thought we agreed that a Notice to Quit can be served on a tenant who has purported to create a sub-tenancy in breach of their tenancy and is no longer in occupation. Anyway, s.13 of the RRB definitely abolishes them.
But I now see that s. 19 of the RRB preserves Notices to Quit when served on landlords by tenants.
John Frith
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up19:08 PM, 6th October 2024, About 2 months ago
Reply to the comment left by DPT at 06/10/2024 - 14:07
As I can't substantiate my claim, I'll concede the point to you.