Notice statutory periodic tenancy

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

    Notice statutory periodic tenancy

    Hi,

    We usually have tenants staying long term on statutory periodic tenancies. After a few years without any tenant moving out we have now had one of them giving their notice.

    In the past the tenant always had to give a minimum notice of one month AND the notice had to expire at the end of a rent period.
    The letting agent insists this is not the case for a periodic tenancy, and that it just has to be one months notice - which can expire on any date. I don't really mind either way but would like to know if the regulations have changed.

    I could not find anything about any changes, and in the current 'how to rent' guide it just says the tenancy agreement should tell the tenant what the notice period is.

    Have there been any changes to the regulations in the last few years?

    Thanks!

    #2
    Originally posted by joerg View Post
    In the past the tenant always had to give a minimum notice of one month AND the notice had to expire at the end of a rent period.
    The letting agent insists this is not the case for a periodic tenancy, and that it just has to be one months notice - which can expire on any date. I don't really mind either way but would like to know if the regulations have changed.
    It haven't. You can specify something different for a contractual periodic tenancy, but if it's SPT, then common law applies and that haven't been modified by any legislation.
    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


      #3
      The S in SPT means it isn't common law! The notice periods for SPTs are part of the statute. They haven't change for tenants, but, in England, they have changed for landlords, since originally enacted.

      Comment


        #4
        Sigh, the S for statutory merely mean the periodic tenancy (PT) part was created by statue, specifically here s5 of the Housing Act 1988.

        Common law applies to everything unless the parties in a contract agreed to otherwise, or it have been overridden by legislation. In this case, s5 of the Housing Act 1988 rendered any clauses in the original tenancy regarding giving notice as null and of no effect when carried over onto the subsequent periodic tenancy while the tenancy is assured. That leaves the common law as amended by statue.

        The statue of interest here is the Protection from Eviction Act 1977, which requires a notice to quit to be in writing and of at least four weeks long. It also required the inclusion of prescribed information in a NTQ, but such information have only been prescribed for a NTQ given by a landlord. Aside from those requirements, all the existing requirements per common law / court authorities apply.
        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


          #5
          Thank you very much for your replies. So for then tenants' notice nothing has changed and it has to expire at the end of the rental period. Let's see if I can convince the agent...

          Comment


            #6
            Instead of trying to convince the agent, ask the agent on what basis they based their advice/opinion on, specifically when it differs to what Shelter England advises: https://england.shelter.org.uk/legal...o_quit_tenants.
            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


              #7
              Thanks! I did as suggested and got the following answer:

              'The deregulation act that came into force in 2015 stated that the notice does not need to be in line with the rental due date and the tenant only has to give one full months’ notice. Likewise, you as the landlord do not have to give your two months notice in line with the rental due date either.'

              I had a look and it seems this only applies to S 21 notices served by the landlord. Is that correct??

              Comment


                #8
                You already know the answer to the question you're asking.

                Section 35 of the Deregulation Act 2015 removed "the requirement for the date specified in the notice to be the last day of a period of the tenancy" for a notice under s21(4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988. Incidentally, if the tenancy is a SPT arising from a fixed term tenancy, that were already the case since the landlord could serve a notice under s21(1) instead where there were never such restriction: see Spencer v Taylor [2013]. No changes were made in the Deregulation Act that affected notices to quit.
                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


                  #9
                  Originally posted by joerg View Post
                  Thanks! I did as suggested and got the following answer:

                  'The deregulation act that came into force in 2015 stated that the notice does not need to be in line with the rental due date and the tenant only has to give one full months’ notice. Likewise, you as the landlord do not have to give your two months notice in line with the rental due date either.'

                  I had a look and it seems this only applies to S 21 notices served by the landlord. Is that correct??
                  My understanding is the same as your understanding.
                  It was only addressed in the Act because of a judgement on S21 notices.

                  I would be interested to hear what section and paragraph of the Deregulation Act they are relying on.

                  In the mean time I would be instructing them that their interpretation is wrong, and I would be looking fr an agent that understands the law or employs the services of a solicitor that does.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by joerg View Post
                    I had a look and it seems this only applies to S 21 notices served by the landlord. Is that correct??
                    You are correct, it doesn't apply to notice by a tenant.

                    If you want, you can accept the tenant's notice, even if it's not valid, because your agreement is all that's necessary.
                    If the agent has accepted the tenant's notice on your behalf, it's also been agreed with you.

                    The end of the tenancy period is useful because it usually lines up with the rent dates.
                    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


                      #11
                      If notice that does not end at the end of a rent period is accepted, then I believe there is no requirement to pro-rata rent, and no requirement to refund any rent paid for the final period.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by MdeB View Post
                        If notice that does not end at the end of a rent period is accepted, then I believe there is no requirement to pro-rata rent, and no requirement to refund any rent paid for the final period.
                        In theory it depends on what the tenancy agreement says (although I've never come across one that covers the situation).

                        Usually there's standard text about rent being due in advance on date xx/xx/xxxx and nothing about paying it back if the tenancy ends early.

                        It's something that it would be useful for a court to rule on (because keeping rent paid in advance when it isn't actually due isn't particularly equitable).
                        But the amounts involved are relatively small, so it's unlikely to be recorded unless it's a big commercial case.
                        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


                          #13
                          It'll pretty much be as you said what was agreed, whether in the original tenancy agreement or when accepting the short notice.

                          If nothing is stated explicitly, I think any new case will find it impossible to distinguish from Marks and Spencer PLC v BNP Paribas.
                          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

                          Latest Activity

                          Collapse

                          Working...
                          X