LTA 1954 Part II excluded; T occupies after expiry; re-entry?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • LTA 1954 Part II excluded; T occupies after expiry; re-entry?

    I am a LL of commercial premises. The Lease I granted was for 5 years which expired in March of this year. It was an excluded tenancy. The tenant has simply held over. He has had a very bad history of paying rent and I'm pretty much fed up with it now. His rent is due later this month and there is a re-enrty clause in the Lease, if the rent is not paid within 14 days of it being due. If it is not paid, then can I instruct bailiffs, or indeed myself go in and change the locks and take possession of the property.


    Any advice would be most welcome.

  • #2
    If Part II of LTA 1954 was indeed validly excluded, T CANNOT hold-over. He does not owe you rent- that ceased running on term expiry.

    He is now a trespasser. Begin Possession proceedings at once. DO NOT demand or collect rent- if you do, you're inadvertently creating a new Business Tenancy WITHIN the Act's protection!
    JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
    1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
    2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
    3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
    4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

    Comment


    • #3
      Unfortunately, Rent has already been demanded and accepted since the expiry date. Does the new tenancy, albeit within the Act, continue on the same terms as the previous lease. I.e. do I still have protection of the 14 day rule for forfeiture.

      Comment


      • #4
        It is not the case that the tenancy continues under the Act, since the Act was disapplied. Rather a new tenancy has arisen. Its terms are the same as the old tenancy except to the extent that are inconsistent with a periodic tenancy. The provisions for foreiture continue to apply.

        Comment


        • #5
          Thank you. So if he is late with his payment again, Can I exercise the right to re-enter. I have neevr done this before and was wondering whether anyone had any experience in this area.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post
            The provisions for forfeiture continue to apply.
            ...but, unfortunately, the statutory exclusion doesn't. Oops; L is lumbered unless s.25 Notice is now served on T.
            JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
            1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
            2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
            3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
            4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

            Comment


            • #7
              I dont really mind the protection part but Im worried he is not payng the rent, at least not on time. So really I wish to catch him on the right of re-entry clause.

              Comment


              • #8
                I have been searching the Internet for Bailiffs just to get a head start. There seem to be som many. Is anyone able to recommend any bailiff who is able to effect peaceful re-entry.

                Thanks.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by jeffrey View Post
                  ...but, unfortunately, the statutory exclusion doesn't. Oops; L is lumbered unless s.25 Notice is now served on T.
                  The fact that the tenancy is now protected does not exclude the right to forfeit.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post
                    The fact that the tenancy is now protected does not exclude the right to forfeit.
                    True. However:
                    a. the new letting is oral only and not referrable to the expired Tenancy Agreement (so any forfeiture provisions in it are irrelevant); and
                    b. the inadvertent protection is nevertheless unfortunate.
                    JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
                    1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
                    2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
                    3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
                    4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Even if the tenancy does not continue by virtue of the 1954 Act, the tenant is still "holding over". The terms of the written agreement will apply.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Thank you all. I do now understand the issue regarding the protection but am still not sure about the right to forfeit if he does not pay rent. If he misses the next rent due and it is still not paid for 14 days then would I be able to effect peaceable re-entry. I have never done this before. A few words from someone with experience in this would be most appreciated.

                        Thanks to all.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I think that you may struggle.

                          Most leases allow re-entry after 14 or 21 days if rent is unpaid. My understanding is that this right is not implied by statute.

                          What Jeremy and co are saying, if I am right is that you know have a statutory lease, rather than a continuation of the former lease.

                          If that is the case you would not have the right to re-enter and take peaceable possession.

                          I hope that Jeremy or one of his learned colleagues will confirm that my interpretation is correct.

                          David

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post
                            Even if the tenancy does not continue by virtue of the 1954 Act, the tenant is still "holding over". The terms of the written agreement will apply.
                            "Holding-over" what? The fixed-term lease ended. T is now holding a NEW UNRELATED oral tenancy.
                            JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
                            1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
                            2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
                            3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
                            4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by davidjpowell View Post
                              I think that you may struggle.

                              Most leases allow re-entry after 14 or 21 days if rent is unpaid. My understanding is that this right is not implied by statute.

                              What Jeremy and co are saying, if I am right is that you know have a statutory lease, rather than a continuation of the former lease.

                              If that is the case you would not have the right to re-enter and take peaceable possession.

                              I hope that Jeremy or one of his learned colleagues will confirm that my interpretation is correct.

                              David
                              No-one called Jeremy seems likely to reply.
                              JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
                              1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
                              2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
                              3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
                              4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X