Ending a company let during the fixed term

[twostepsbehind]

Hello,

I bought a property already let to a company, but I need to end this tenancy now.

The tenancy agreement says nothing about sub-letting, yet the company has sub-let the property as a HMO.

Also, the company wasn't even incorporated i.e. didn't exist when the agreement was signed/dated.

What's the best way to end it?

Thanks in advance!

[leaseholder64]

That's a commercial let, not a residential one.

Why would a company want to rent a residential property if they didn't want to sublet it?

I'm pretty sure that if the agreement says nothing about sub-letting, it is permitted.

If the company didn't enter into the initial agreement, how did they become the tenant? What was the nature of the initial tenant?

[jpkeates]

If the tenancy agreement doesn't say anything about sub-letting it's probably allowed.

The tenant is whoever the agreement says is the tenant and unless there's something that requires them to have been incorporated when the agreement was signed that probably doesn't change anything.
Even if the agreement weren't valid for some technical reason, there's obviously some kind of agreement in place because everyone is behaving as if it were.

How the tenancy can be ended will be contained in the tenancy agreement, which you should have been aware of when purchasing the property.

Two things to consider.
If the company lease ends and the occupants remain, they'll almost certainly become your tenants.
Is the HMO properly licensed (if it needs to be) and are the local authority happy it exists?

[leaseholder64]

Did they sign up as xxxxxx Limited? Did they give a company registration number?

If not, they were presumably signing as a sole trader. If the name they used wasn't related to their real name, they would still have had to have to included John Smith, of 9999 Acacia Avenue, Anytown, trading as xxxxxxxx, but I don't think failing to do that would invalidate the contract.

Anyone agreeing to a significant contract with a someone purporting to represent a limited company but not providing the registration number and registered office address, might be considered negligent.

If there has been an irregularity, I think the effect would be that the person who signed is the party to the contract, rather than that the contract is void.

[leaseholder64]

If the property was let to a business, there never was an AST as far as you are concerned. However most purported AST agreements have clauses that take over if the AST status fails.

[jpkeates]

Hi - thanks, but how can somebody sign on behalf of a legal entity that doesn't exist - why does there have to be something that requires for the company to incorporated? Isn't this misrepresentation?

Anyone that the other party accepts can sign an agreement for someone can sign the agreement.
It's only misrepresentation if the person signing misrepresents themselves.

Your chances of any success there are minimal without the support of the previous owner, who would be the person to whom the misrepresentaion happened.

I read this on Citizens Advice: If you sublet your entire home

Companies are legal persons but not people and don't have homes.
As it happens that advice isn't relevant to anything other than council lets.

[jpkeates]

Surely the time to sort this out was before the purchase completed?

[leaseholder64]

To be an AST, it has to be their principal home.

[theartfullodger]

Why did you buy with the paperwork in such a mess? Did you not investigate, even a little, first?

Do they have the right to have an office in the property?

STRONGLY suggest you look at this (only available for a few days..) on some of the risks of this sort of deal...
https://landlordlawservices.co.uk/me...t-arrangements

Hope you got a really really low price....

[leaseholder64]

Also section 8 cannot be used unless there is a fault, and nothing said so far seems to suggest one.

[theartfullodger]

In addition, to be an AST the tenant (your tenant, you have no contract with the occupants) must be a human or humans.

[jpkeates]

Now, as the limited company was non-existent at the time the tenancy was signed/dated, the individual who signed it becomes the tenant, is that right?

Not neccessarily.
And it still can't be an AST if that person doesn't live there.

How does the agreement describe the tenant (don't use the actual details, this web site is scanned by google).

[KTC]

Human, company, AST, common law, etc. Nothing has been stated that suggest the OP has any grounds or power to end the fixed term early, or for that matter, ability to end any sub-tenancies.

[jpkeates]

The tenancy agreement has a break clause - landlord can give two months notice - is this my out?

Well, duh!

[KTC]

The tenancy agreement has a break clause - landlord can give two months notice - is this my out?

Possibly, depending on its wordings? What does it say?

Even if it provide you an ability to end the immediate tenancy, the sub-tenants will just become your tenants, you still wouldn't have vacant possession.