End of student tenancies as we know them?
9:14 AM, 19th May 2025, 11 months ago
42
Hello, Reading about the Renters’ Right Bill, it appears to me that if you have let a property to a group of students on a new periodic tenancy then one student can terminate the whole tenancy on two months notice.
Does it mean that that student can walk away and leave the other students without a valid tenancy agreement?
As I understand it, once a one joint tenant serves notice the whole tenancy will cease to exist.
Whilst in normal circumstances the landlord would probably grant a new tenancy to the remaining students and hope to fill the empty room, is it possible that the landlord could tell the remaining students they must leave when the notice expires which would leave them very exposed?
This would obviously only happen if the landlord had an alternative use for the house.
Reading the press it appears that there may be opportunities to lease to the government for migrants and that may prove to be more attractive.
I am just curious to know what position the remaining students would be in if the landlord decided that they wanted to take the house back?
Thank you,
Joanna
Tags:
impact on student housing, renters rights bill, Student accommodation, Student Housing, student landlords
Comments
Have Your Say
Every day, landlords who want to influence policy and share real-world experience add their voice here. Your perspective helps keep the debate balanced.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
or
Previous Article
Buy to let mortgage arrears fallNext Article
Section 21 struck out?
Member Since October 2020 - Comments: 198
5:18 PM, 20th May 2025, About 11 months ago
Reply to the comment left by DPT at 20/05/2025 – 09:56
Your point on joint tenancy is on the money, that’s why one will be able to accept/agree a withdrawal of an NTQ (post RRB) with individuals other than the person who gave the NTQ in the first instance. The effect would be to protect those who do not wish to leave from eviction which is the purpose of the 1977 Act, it’s sound in law.
Member Since October 2020 - Comments: 1144
1:04 PM, 21st May 2025, About 11 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Simon F at 20/05/2025 – 17:18Unless you’ve seen an amendment that I’ve missed, then one or even 3 out of 4 tenants won’t be able to withdraw the notice because they all have to act unanimously. The one or the three are not the Tenant.
Member Since October 2020 - Comments: 1144
1:08 PM, 21st May 2025, About 11 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Simon F at 20/05/2025 – 17:18
Unless you seen a clause or an amendment to the RRB that I’ve missed then one tenant or even three out of four tenants won’t be able to withdraw the notice because they all have to act unanimously. The one or the three are not the Tenant, (capital T).
Member Since October 2020 - Comments: 198
1:26 PM, 21st May 2025, About 11 months ago
Reply to the comment left by DPT at 21/05/2025 – 13:08
In Scotland, they all need to sign an NTQ, but in England any one of the group can do that. That’s the OP’s concern.
Member Since September 2023 - Comments: 157
1:35 PM, 21st May 2025, About 11 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Simon F at 21/05/2025 – 13:26
That’s the current law already. Atleast outside a fixed term. But it causes issues both ways.
In Scotland, you can be trapped in the tenancy because the other tenant doesn’t want to leave. You need everyone named for notice to be valid.
In England, any tenant can hand in NTQ and not tell the other tenants. Then they leave, making the now other “residents”, overstayers subject to mensi profits (double rent).
Member Since October 2020 - Comments: 198
1:59 PM, 21st May 2025, About 11 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Jonathan Willis at 21/05/2025 – 13:35
But there is a useful change in RRB in the amendment to the Protection form Eviction Act 1977. An NTQ can now be lawfully withdrawn by agreement. If an NTQ can be served by any one of many, it can be withdrawn that way too. I’m putting a majority rule clause on this in my student contracts.
Member Since September 2023 - Comments: 157
2:14 PM, 21st May 2025, About 11 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Simon F at 21/05/2025 – 13:59
I thought the NTQ could always be revoked if tenants and landlord agreed as a mutual decision. But I guess not. They have to start a new tenancy which I haven’t seen before.
Not sure how much it really helps anyone, unless the notice was sent by mistake, otherwise it just let’s tenants continue on periodic instead of going to a new fixed term if they change their mind.
Doesn’t stop the issue of 1 tenant ending the tenancy for everyone, and still requires the landlord to agree to revoke it. The odds of everyone been in agreement seems slim to me. But that’s just my opinion.
Member Since August 2016 - Comments: 12
6:24 PM, 21st May 2025, About 11 months ago
Simon you say you are putting a majority rule clause in your student contracts. Do you think this will stop one tenant serving a NTQ which if served would bring the entire tenancy to an end?
Member Since September 2023 - Comments: 157
6:25 PM, 21st May 2025, About 11 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Joanna Fear at 21/05/2025 – 18:24
Not sure if would work, if NTQ by one tenant becomes a statutory right, a contract can’t overrule it. Will be curious to see what the finished legislation will be.
Member Since October 2020 - Comments: 198
6:35 PM, 21st May 2025, About 11 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Joanna Fear at 21/05/2025 – 18:24
I’m saying if (post RRB) one or two in a group of 5 serves an NTQ, then I will ask others about their intentions and if they prefer to stay and want the NTQ withdrawn. Then I expect to apply a majority rule as to whether the NTQ stands or is withdrawn. I make provision for that possibility at the outset in the written agreement everyone signs.