I want my tenancy to remain periodic but …

I want my tenancy to remain periodic but …

8:16 AM, 16th April 2014, About 10 years ago 72

Text Size

I’ve received a letter from my letting agency (not going to name them) saying that the guidelines and regulations have changed regarding my tenancy going to periodic. I want my tenancy to remain periodic but

I pay monthly so does not seem to make sense to me. Then it goes on to say I might, in the next few months, have to sign a 6 months tenancy and thereafter it will change back to monthly after that all because of this change.

I’m not happy with my landlord as I have been in the property for 2 years and have asked for work to be done (basic maintenance to the building such windows and damp which is up to him as the landlord) and nothing been done. Due to my circumstances though I’m stuck here for now.

Can they make me sign this 6 months agreement?

They have breached their side of the contract and it seems the law favours the landlord.

I’m stuck and would like advice as I have always paid my rent and due to my current position I would find it hard to move so I’m stuck in catch 22.

Any advice please would be much appreciated.

Many thanks

Michelle


Share This Article


Comments

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118

9:19 AM, 16th April 2014, About 10 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Industry Observer " at "16/04/2014 - 09:11":

I agree with your paragraphs 1 and 2.

Para 3 is pure speculation but given that the agent now appears to be considering the ramifications of Superstrike I would not come to the same conclusion as you have done. Hopeless agents have never heard of Superstrike case, never mind considered the ramifications and taken advice on the possible ways to address the issue of any possible chose in action.
.

Laura Delow

9:25 AM, 16th April 2014, About 10 years ago

I hear all your comments & it may well be that the landlord & agent are equally at fault in misleading Michelle but it all still begs the question; for a landlord, normally a new tenancy agreement is asked for even if no rent increase in order to get security of tenancy for at least 6 months & if there's no increase in rent, although Michelle is unhappy with the landlord, if not moving for reasons we are unaware of, why would you not agree to sign a new tenancy agreement Michelle? If we understand the motivation of all parties first, our advice will hold more water albeit meanwhile I do agree Michelle should check who her deposit is registered with in case it's not.

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118

9:25 AM, 16th April 2014, About 10 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Laura Delow" at "16/04/2014 - 08:56":

Hi Laura

We don't know what Michelle's circumstances are unless she comes back to post the answer to your question. However, there are several reasons why tenants feel trapped including; loss of job, giving birth, change of job/income, other family ties, change in credit status, no longer with the same partner hence a drop in income to qualify for new referencing etc. etc.
.

Industry Observer

9:30 AM, 16th April 2014, About 10 years ago

Agree with Romain 100%

Agent either woefully ignorant or trying it on (or both!!).

Laura Delow

9:30 AM, 16th April 2014, About 10 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "16/04/2014 - 09:25":

Hi Mark, I understand that but why not sign a new AST if not moving on for whatever reason? Is there a reason Michelle doesn't want to sign we've not yet been made aware of? Until Michelle explains this point, it will still be a lingering question I have. Meanwhile I think we all agree it's highly probable it's the agent muddying the waters trying to get a new AST to justify charging fees which screws the landlord too.

Mark Lynham

9:31 AM, 16th April 2014, About 10 years ago

i do wish someone would do a test case on deposits as since the Superstrike case all people bang on about is who is right and who is wrong and take your landlord or agent to court..... also with regards to this landlord not doing repairs .. (basic maintenance to the building such windows and damp which is up to him as the landlord).... what if this is condensation? my understanding is that the landlord doesnt cause this/ or maybe im wrong... and what if it is a tenant that just wants new windows? lets be honest, tenants will always say things are worse than what they are and landlords will probably say they are better than what they are....

Laura Delow

9:33 AM, 16th April 2014, About 10 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Lynham" at "16/04/2014 - 09:31":

Blunt to the point comments but true sadly in many a case. Hence why we need to know more about Michelle's situation/claims.

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118

9:37 AM, 16th April 2014, About 10 years ago

I agree with the points made by Mark L and Laura, however, if this landlord/agent is a bit of a shyster why would Michelle want to commit to staying for another 6 months given that her circumstances might change? Whilst her tenancy is periodic she is only committed to one months notice.
.

Industry Observer

9:38 AM, 16th April 2014, About 10 years ago

Mark Lynham
What do you want clarifying on Superstrike the CoA gave a very clear decision which simply confirmed what s5 of the 88 Act has alays said.

The only people banging on are those who do not like the decision - when to be 100% safe all you have to do is re-issue PII and press the odd button for the Scheme - if that.

So much energy wasted.

I posted the other day that on good informed authority my understanding is Superstrike and Johnson v Old are going nowhere and Spencer v Taylor will go to Supreme Court - and probably be overturned as it is a daft decision

Romain Garcin

9:40 AM, 16th April 2014, About 10 years ago

Regarding Michelle's situation and in relation to the tenancy deposit, I think the only legitimate reason to want to create a new tenancy is if the deposit is not at all protected.

If that's the case, indeed creating a new tenancy would allow them to correctly protect the deposit and to then be able to serve s.21 notices.
The liability for the breach would remain, but they is nothing they can do about that.

If they are only worried about the PI, then they could just serve them now.

Michelle should perhaps probe them on that and make clear that she does not wish to enter into a new fixed term tenancy.

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