another break clause question

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

    another break clause question

    Hello people

    i would like to have your opinion on my break clause. Basically it is misleading and me and my agent failed to read it properly. It is also unfair since i have asked for a 6 months break clause, which as we all know means that i want to give 2 months notice after 6 months and then leave from the apartment. However the break clause states:

    "the landlord and tenant shall have the right to terminate the tenancy at the end of the first 6 months period by giving no less than 2 months notice in writing on or before 25th september 2018 and upon the expiration of such notice this agreement and everything herein contained shall cease and be void subject to the right of the parties in respect of any antecedent breach of any of the covenants herein contained"

    So as i entered the property in june instead of the break clause letting me out after 6 months by giving 2 months notice , it just allowed me to give a notice between June and September!

    Can i interpret this break clause the way i wanted it to be ? Also are these fixed term contracts so powerful that bind the two parties together regardless of any circumstances that may arise ?

    I was under the impression that the letting agreements are for the protection of the tenant and not for the protection of the owner who is in a more advantageous position anyway

    thanks in advance

    #2
    As I understand it, a six month break clause can only be exercised at exactly six months. You seem to be expecting to exercise it at 8 months.

    To me the clause seems to say:

    - you can leave at exactly six months;
    - to do so, you must have given notice two months earlier;
    - for the avoidance of doubt, two months earlier is September 25th (presumably the tenancy started on June 26th?

    What you probably actually wanted is a six month AST, without a break clause, which was allowed to convert to an SPT.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by user View Post
      Can i interpret this break clause the way i wanted it to be ? Also are these fixed term contracts so powerful that bind the two parties together regardless of any circumstances that may arise ?

      I was under the impression that the letting agreements are for the protection of the tenant and not for the protection of the owner who is in a more advantageous position anyway
      You can't just interpret a contractual clause to mean something it doesn't say because you don't like what it does say.

      A tenancy agreement is a contract between the landlord and tenant. It sets out what you agree to, rights & obligations etc. It applies to both parties. Residential tenancy contracts do fall under consumer law protections, but that's not going to help you here.
      I am not a lawyer, nor am I licensed to provide any regulated advice. None of my posts should be treated as legal or financial advice.

      I do not answer questions through private messages which should be posted publicly on the forum.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by user View Post
        I was under the impression that the letting agreements are for the protection of the tenant and not for the protection of the owner
        They are to protect both the landlord and the tenant

        Comment


          #5
          Well the issue is that i have a serious reason to leave from the apartment and i am trying to communicate this with the landlord early enough.
          I cannot understand why i am not allowed to leave early and i am bound to pay the rent regardless of my circumstances , especially when i had clearly asked for a 6 month break clause.

          If the fixed term contract period was such a serious matter for the landlord they should have communicated that in advance instead of giving a misleading break clause. Then it would be fair for both parties to enter in an agreement were both knew what is going on.

          My issue here is that i had tried to have a break clause in my contract , the landlord agreed , but gave me something else instead.
          I know that is my obligation to read also the contract but we obviously didnt pay attention enough.
          What would be the best exit strategy for me ? as it seems right now only finding a replacement would be an option.

          Comment


            #6
            The LL (othing to do with owner) has given you 6 month break clause, as requested, provided you give min 2 months Notice, not to expire before end of 6th month of AST..
            If you need to vacate sooner, you can ask LL for his terms for early surrender, which can include rent etc, up to expiry of the required Notice.

            Please complete & paste https://forums.landlordzone.co.uk/fo...ll-new-posters

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by user View Post
              Well the issue is that i have a serious reason to leave from the apartment and i am trying to communicate this with the landlord early enough.
              I cannot understand why i am not allowed to leave early and i am bound to pay the rent regardless of my circumstances , especially when i had clearly asked for a 6 month break clause.

              If the fixed term contract period was such a serious matter for the landlord they should have communicated that in advance instead of giving a misleading break clause. Then it would be fair for both parties to enter in an agreement were both knew what is going on.

              My issue here is that i had tried to have a break clause in my contract , the landlord agreed , but gave me something else instead.
              I know that is my obligation to read also the contract but we obviously didnt pay attention enough.
              What would be the best exit strategy for me ? as it seems right now only finding a replacement would be an option.
              I'm a little confused, because you asked for a six month break clause and what you have posted looks like a six month break clause.
              It's not unusual for a break clause to be only usable at a specific point in time.

              If there is a break clause for the landlord which is more advantageous, you might have a point about unfairness.

              Otherwise the fixed term you have entered into is binding, which is why it's a fixed term.
              If you wanted a tenancy where you were committed for six months and could then leave after that point at any time (with notice) you should have asked for a tenancy with a six month fixed term - and the landlord could have agreed or declined.

              The best exit strategy is one you agree with the landlord - they don't have to accept a replacement.
              You may be able to sublet the property (if the tenancy agreement says you can't, the worst your landlord is probably able to do if you breach the term is evict you.

              You make reference to "your agent".
              If you mean the letting agent, they are working for the landlord and not you.

              How long are you committed to?
              When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
              Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by user View Post
                I cannot understand why i am not allowed to leave early and i am bound to pay the rent regardless of my circumstances , especially when i had clearly asked for a 6 month break clause.
                What you asked for and what you got is a 6-month break clause.

                What you seem to have wanted and did not get (and probably did not ask for) is a clause allowing you to end the tenancy at the end of the 6th or any later month of the tenancy.

                You asked for a break clause; you got one; you did not check that the clause was what you wanted; you should have continued negotiating.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Hello guys
                  unfortunately my letting agent told me that the break clause means that i can leave the apartment after giving 2 months notice., and as i now understand this is completely wrong. Thats why all this confusion , even worst he adviced me to just step out of the property and basically do not care as my contract will justify me to do so ...

                  Comment


                    #10
                    How much longer does the fixed term last.

                    Remember that the letting agent is the Landlord's agent, not yours.
                    When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
                    Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

                    Comment

                    Latest Activity

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X