Superstrike rules clarity required for 3 times 3 penalty?

Superstrike rules clarity required for 3 times 3 penalty?

13:39 PM, 17th March 2014, About 8 years ago 47

Text Size

Hi All,

Looking for some advice….

We (married couple) have been Tenants since 2nd Feb 13 on a 6 month fixed term AST
On 2nd Aug 13 we signed another 6 month FT AST
On 2nd Feb 14 we signed another 6 month FT AST.

Recently due to repairs not being done, gas certificate not being provided, EPC report not provided etc. we sent an email to the Landlord on 6/3/14 highlighting all the issues and included a request for the reference number for our deposit scheme.

The Landlord had not (confirmed proof) protected our deposit of £550.00 until they had received our email on 6/3/14.

On 6/3/14 the Landlord protected our deposit On 10/3/14

I have read the Superstrike case and am confused…. I have been told that each of the tenancies was a ‘new’ FT Tenancy so it would be classed if court proceedings were issued as 3x 1-3x Penalty.
Others have told me that it would be one case (1x) 1-3x Penalty.

My question who is right?

Many thanks

Red3x3



Comments

Michael Barnes

19:41 PM, 5th May 2014, About 8 years ago

It would appear that the s21 notice is invalid because it specifies a date before the end of the fixed term.

You have no obligation to inform your landlord of this.

Romain Garcin

19:46 PM, 5th May 2014, About 8 years ago

S.21 notice should indeed be invalid as MdeB states, unless perhaps if there is a break clause in the tenancy agreement.

As for return of deposit, the landlord does not need the tenant's permission to return his own money to him...

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118 View Profile

20:05 PM, 5th May 2014, About 8 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Leanne Frisby" at "05/05/2014 - 19:05":

Thanks, repaying the deposit does make a difference but they will certainly not be able to obtain a possession under until after the expiry of the initial fixed term. The fact that the expiry date of the s21 notice is before the end of the fixed term may well invalidate it completely but I am unaware of whether this has ever been challenged in Court to create any case law.
.

Michael Barnes

20:18 PM, 5th May 2014, About 8 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "05/05/2014 - 20:05":

I see what you mean.

s21 does not say that the (1)(b) notice must give a date no earlier than the last day of the fixed period.
Therefore it could be argued that the notice is valid, but can not be enforced before the end of the fixed term.

For reference, I copy below s21(1) and (2).

(1)Without prejudice to any right of the landlord under an assured shorthold tenancy to recover possession of the dwelling-house let on the tenancy in accordance with Chapter I above, on or after the coming to an end of an assured shorthold tenancy which was a fixed term tenancy, a court shall make an order for possession of the dwelling-house if it is satisfied— .

(a)that the assured shorthold tenancy has come to an end and no further assured tenancy (whether shorthold or not) is for the time being in existence, other than [F1an assured shorthold periodic tenancy (whether statutory or not)]; and .

(b)the landlord or, in the case of joint landlords, at least one of them has given to the tenant not less than two months’ notice [F2in writing] stating that he requires possession of the dwelling-house. .

(2)A notice under paragraph (b) of subsection (1) above may be given before or on the day on which the tenancy comes to an end; and that subsection shall have effect notwithstanding that on the coming to an end of the fixed term tenancy a statutory periodic tenancy arises.

Michael Barnes

20:34 PM, 5th May 2014, About 8 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Romain " at "05/05/2014 - 19:46":

Romain,

Mark's comment above has caused me to doubt my earlier post stating that the s21 is invalid because it specifies a date before the end of the fixed term (see my post above).

However, s21 requires 2 months' notice.
Does that mean that, as the 'after' date is 2 months after the notice date, for the s21 to be valid it must have been hand-delivered to arrive by a specific time on the date given by the notice?

My feeling is if it was posted, then the two monts' notice would not have been given because the 'after' date was 2 months after the notice date.
But whilst writing this the thought has popped into my tiny mind that it might be OK because the notice would be received more than 2 months before the effective date which is the end of the fixed term.

My brain hurts!

Romain Garcin

10:20 AM, 6th May 2014, About 8 years ago

Ah this has been debated all over the place because indeed s.21(1) does not state when the notice must expire.
I am not aware of any case law so it might go both ways indeed, though I think that the probability is that the court will say 'no'.

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118 View Profile

11:42 AM, 6th May 2014, About 8 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Romain " at "06/05/2014 - 10:20":

The Court will say ~No' - to whom is the question LOL
.

1 2 3 4 5

Leave Comments

In order to post comments you will need to Sign In or Sign Up for a FREE Membership

or

Don't have an account? Sign Up

Landlord Tax Planning Book Now