Standard Assured Tenancy: deposit/eviction rules?

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

  • Standard Assured Tenancy: deposit/eviction rules?

    I have just read this '
    Since 6 April 2007, all deposits (for rent up to £25,000 per annum) taken by landlords and agents for assured shorthold tenancies (AST) in England and Wales have had to be protected by an authorised tenancy deposit scheme.'

    What if the rent is over £25,000? What do I have to do with the deposit?

  • #2
    Originally posted by Thyrsis View Post
    I have just read this '
    Since 6 April 2007, all deposits (for rent up to £25,000 per annum) taken by landlords and agents for assured shorthold tenancies (AST) in England and Wales have had to be protected by an authorised tenancy deposit scheme.'

    What if the rent is over £25,000? What do I have to do with the deposit?
    1. Deposit rules apply only to ASTs.
    2. Letting at > £25 000 p.a. cannot be AST.
    3. So the rules do not apply in your case.
    4. Deposit is therefore capable of beng held by L in the 'old' way, as if the rules never existed.
    5. Preferrably place deposit in its own little (interest-bearing) bank/B.Soc. account, to contain nothing else, and ask Bank/B.Soc. to give the account an appropriate title (e.g. "Mr Landlord (Deposit account on trust for Mr Tenant)"). This ring-fences it, esp. if L ever becomes insolvent or disappears.
    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
      Thanks, I need to do some more research! Where can i find more about this? Even this website only says 'All new tenancies since 28 February 1997 are automatically Assured Shortholds, unless the agreement has specified an Assured Tenancy.' Nothing about if the rent is over £25,000!

      I've been sent an AST document by the company involved in the let, even though the rent is over £25,000.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Thyrsis View Post
        Thanks, I need to do some more research! Where can i find more about this? Even this website only says 'All new tenancies since 28 February 1997 are automatically Assured Shortholds, unless the agreement has specified an Assured Tenancy.' Nothing about if the rent is over £25,000!

        I've been sent an AST document by the company involved in the let, even though the rent is over £25,000.
        So this website's misleading- as if that's never happened on a website!

        See Schedule I to Housing Act 1988. This lists cases that, by definition, are outside the Act (so which cannot be AST or SAT). Amongst them is paragraph 2(1): "A tenancy which is entered into on or after 1 April 1990...under which the rent payable for the time being is payable at a rate exceding £25 000 a year."

        No matter what your L's useless agents say, and irrespective of the Letting Agreement's text, this case of yours is not going to be an AST.
        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


        • #5
          Wrong type of tenancy agreement!

          I have just found out that the agents who let my property (reputable national company!) should not have used an AST as the rent is higher than £25,000. I have been advised that the tenancy agreement is not therefore binding. What should I do about this?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Thyrsis View Post
            I have just found out that the agents who let my property (reputable national company!) should not have used an AST as the rent is higher than £25,000. I have been advised that the tenancy agreement is not therefore binding. What should I do about this?
            Wrong! It is binding, but it's not an AST.
            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
              So the fact that it says 'ASSURED SHORTHOLD TENANCY AGREEMENT' across the top does not mean that it is an AST??

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Thyrsis View Post
                So the fact that it says 'ASSURED SHORTHOLD TENANCY AGREEMENT' across the top does not mean that it is an AST??
                Yes, that's correct. If I label an apple "Turnip", is it
                a. an apple; or
                b. a turnip?
                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


                • #9
                  ...and see paragraph 2 (1) in Schedule 1 to Housing Act 1988 for the provision which stops the letting of a higher-rent property from falling within the Act at all.
                  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


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Thyrsis View Post
                    I have just found out that the agents who let my property (reputable national company!) should not have used an AST as the rent is higher than £25,000...What should I do about this?
                    You might reasonably point out to them that they're wrong. You pay them for a service which they don't seem too well-equipped to deliver.
                    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
                      Res. letting @ rent > £25 000; what is its status?

                      I was flicking through the landlord development manual when I noticed a chapter entitled "3.1.5 Tenancies which cannot be Assured or Assured Shorthold Tenancies (Common Law Tenancies)."

                      According to this chapter the rental agreement I have cannot be an AST due to it being over 25k per year. The problem is that my tenancy agreement states that it is intended to be an Assured Shorthold Tenancy.

                      So what status does the rental agreement have? Did we just have a periodic tenancy all along and a nonsense document signed by me and the tenant?

                      Could someone please try to explain it to me? I get the impression that this could be really messy.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        It's not an AST as rent > £25k therefore Housing Act(s) don't apply.

                        It's a straightforward contract for rent and if they breach the terms of the contract then you can apply to the courts for possession.

                        Also, since you are paying Landlord Action, why not ask them?!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          So does that mean that we can just ask the tenants to leave?

                          Do they really have no right to stay in the property despite the intended duration of the agreement?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by attilathelandlord View Post
                            It's not an AST as rent > £25k therefore Housing Act(s) don't apply.

                            It's a straightforward contract for rent and if they breach the terms of the contract then you can apply to the courts for possession.
                            True. Even using an AST form will NOT make it an AST. Read paragraph 2 in Schedule 1 to Housing Act 1988.
                            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 htrj View Post
                              So does that mean that we can just ask the tenants to leave?

                              Do they really have no right to stay in the property despite the intended duration of the agreement?
                              The Agreement DOES create a binding tenancy. During its term, L cannot terminate it unless T is in breach. After its term expires, conversely, T has no continuation rights at all. The Agreement is read literally, as no Housing Act 1988 provisions apply to it.
                              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

                              • NTQ during fixed term?
                                vpltd
                                Hi,
                                Can a LL issue a valid NTQ during the six-month fixed term of an AST agreement?
                                (A residential let in England.)
                                VPL.
                                11-08-2017, 14:53 PM
                              • Reply to NTQ during fixed term?
                                jjlandlord
                                You made a claim. You tell us.



                                It was claimed that a tenant may freely leave whenever he pleases once he has received a s.21notice. If that was indeed the case you can imagine the mess with all those precautionary notices.



                                It was already the case...
                                18-08-2017, 12:43 PM
                              • Reply to NTQ during fixed term?
                                Wright76
                                I totally agree, I was just trying to find any justification for claims that a tenant must serve notice in return of a section 21. It could never ever be demanded within the 2 month notice period, and in my opinion I agree it couldn't be demanded thereafter. But JJlandlord is adamant that requirement...
                                18-08-2017, 12:40 PM
                              • Lying tenant
                                mazco
                                We had a tenant in our property. Initial agreement was for 6 months from April 2016 but then went on to SPT.
                                In June he didn't pay his rent due on 15th of the month. Chased him and got excuses. On 10th July got a text from him saying he had moved out and left a key under the mat for us. He reckoned...
                                18-08-2017, 12:03 PM
                              • Reply to Lying tenant
                                JK0
                                Hmm. If tenant was stupid enough to leave valuable furniture behind, it's JK0's money in my book.

                                (Not that that ever happened. All I get left is broken Ikea tat.)
                                18-08-2017, 12:30 PM
                              • Reply to Lying tenant
                                jpkeates
                                The deposit doesn't limit what you can try and recover from the tenant.
                                It's simply a convention designed to make a simple claim easier.

                                You can't sell the tenant's goods and use the proceeds to settle their debt without their consent.
                                That's the tenant's money.
                                18-08-2017, 12:27 PM
                              • Reply to Lying tenant
                                mazco
                                Unfortunately the deposit doesn't come close to what he already owes. Deposit of just over £1100 to cover two months rent at £900 per month, replacement carpet £200, bath replacement needed, disposal of rubbish, clearing of garden. He 'kindly' left us some furniture which I managed to sell for around...
                                18-08-2017, 12:24 PM
                              • Reply to Lying tenant
                                jpkeates
                                And, of course, this....
                                18-08-2017, 12:22 PM
                              • Reply to Lying tenant
                                jpkeates
                                There are rules about who is responsible for the council tax. And they relate to residence, not the tenancy.
                                If the tenant is in the fixed term of a tenancy agreement, that means they're liable.
                                If they are in a rolling agreement and move out, you are liable.

                                If the tenancy...
                                18-08-2017, 12:21 PM
                              • Reply to Lying tenant
                                JK0
                                I'd forget about getting utilites to believe you. Just work out a reasonable extra amount to add to deposit request.
                                18-08-2017, 12:18 PM
                              Working...
                              X