Agreement for 3 month primary residence letting

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

    #16
    Originally posted by ringzer View Post
    However one point I would like to reiterate is that the proposed family already own a property in Kent (ironically their holiday home and use that at the weekend.) So I believe this has an impact on the type of tenancy I could offer them as it wouldn't be their only residence.
    Well that means it would probably have to be a residential tenancy.
    Where can I find out more about a non-shorthold tenancy? Which act is it defined in?
    Housing Act 1988
    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


      #17
      Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post

      The minimum term for an AST is 6 months. There is no minimum term for a non-shorthold assured tenancy.
      Looking online I found this "An AST can be for any term (the rule requiring them to be for a minimum term of six months was abolished by the Housing Act 1996), although in fact the vast majority of tenancies are for terms of at least six months." - https://www.netrent.co.uk/the-main-d...thold-tenancy/

      Comment


        #18
        What I meant was that a tenant is entitled to a minimum of 6 months.

        Comment


          #19
          Can you elaborate please? If the above link is correct and an AST can be for any term, how is a tenant then entitled to a minimum of 6 months?

          Thanks in advance

          Comment


            #20
            However short you make the tenancy you have no rights to evict before 6 months (and usually you can bank on a year or even two to get the tenant out). Therefore you have no possibility of producing a practical 3 month tenancy.

            In other words you CAN write an AST with a 3 month duration (compared to an identical 6 month one) - but the only effect of that is that you grant the tenant a right to leave at 3 months, but you get absolutely no more flexibility or security vs the 6 month one.

            The bottom line is that unless you are prepared to risk not being able to use your home for 1 to 2 years - you should never allow a tenant to stay for any period of time, no matter how apparently advantageous it seems to both parties.

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by AndrewDod View Post
              The bottom line is that unless you are prepared to risk not being able to use your home for 1 to 2 years - you should never allow a tenant to stay for any period of time, no matter how apparently advantageous it seems to both parties.
              It seems that an AST for less than 6 months it out of the question. So what options do I have? There must be something?!

              How about a holiday let (potential tenant owns another property) or non-shorthold tenancy?

              Comment


                #22
                You don't have a risk free option.
                A holiday let is stretching it - it comes down to whether you trust the people who will be in the property to move out when they say that they will.
                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


                  #23
                  Originally posted by ringzer View Post
                  It seems that an AST for less than 6 months it out of the question. So what options do I have? There must be something?!
                  No, bottom line you don't. Rather leave it empty -- unless you have it occupied by a non-paying friend or someone you trust 100% (which is rare)

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
                    You don't have a risk free option.
                    A holiday let is stretching it - it comes down to whether you trust the people who will be in the property to move out when they say that they will.
                    Stretching it in what sense exactly? This potential tenant already has a primary residence so this would be renting of a secondary property i.e. the situation all holiday makers after in when they rent somewhere.
                    Assuming the worst in everyone for a second, if I don't trust someone to move out when they have agreed, what is the main difference in a holiday let over an AST? Or another way, what powers of eviction
                    are available when doing a holiday let? And where exactly is a holiday let defined in law?
                    Thanks in advance

                    Comment


                      #25
                      A holiday let is defined as 'A tenancy the purpose of which is to confer on the tenant the right to occupy the dwelling house for a holiday'
                      You have then to rely on some common sense to decide if the purpose of the rental is really for a holiday; if it comes down to it, a judge would decide, based on the evidence, such as your prior correspondence.
                      If they decide to stay on a while after the 3 months, and claim it's a tenancy, what would you do? Evict and risk being prosecuted for an illegal eviction? Or maybe go through the full court process, which will take months anyway?
                      If you haven't treated it as a tenancy from the start, then you probably haven't met all of the requirements for a valid section 21 notice... Would you protect any deposit? If not, they could again claim it's a tenancy in order to get the penalty from you.

                      Comment


                        #26
                        3 Months is pushing it. The tiniest slip will lose you your home. There is no guarantee that the person will not reassign their residence, not any rule they cannot. If they don't leave what will you do exactly?

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Originally posted by ringzer View Post

                          Stretching it in what sense exactly? This potential tenant already has a primary residence so this would be renting of a secondary property i.e. the situation all holiday makers after in when they rent somewhere.
                          Assuming the worst in everyone for a second, if I don't trust someone to move out when they have agreed, what is the main difference in a holiday let over an AST? Or another way, what powers of eviction
                          are available when doing a holiday let? And where exactly is a holiday let defined in law?
                          Thanks in advance
                          The situation you describe - wanting temporary accommodation while looking for somewhere to buy - cannot be the basis for a holiday let.

                          The significant thing about a holiday let is that the property is not occupied as a residence and so the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 does not apply.

                          The HA 1988 does not define "holiday" so it has it has its ordinary meaning. A holiday let must mean the situation where someone takes a property for a period of rest and/or recreation with the intention of returning home. If you let to someone who responds to an ad in the holiday columns of a newspaper or magazine or a website devoted to holidays you are probably going to be fine, though your suspicions should be aroused if an applicant wants is for more than a few weeks.

                          Comment


                            #28
                            Originally posted by ringzer View Post
                            Stretching it in what sense exactly? This potential tenant already has a primary residence so this would be renting of a secondary property i.e. the situation all holiday makers after in when they rent somewhere.
                            I thought their other property was a holiday home.
                            If they have another property and a holiday home, you might get away with it - however the people posting above have shown the problem with that view.
                            Assuming the worst in everyone for a second, if I don't trust someone to move out when they have agreed, what is the main difference in a holiday let over an AST? Or another way, what powers of eviction are available when doing a holiday let?
                            You can simply lock someone out of a holiday home (and probably use reasonable force to remove them - although that's not been tested AFAIK)
                            And where exactly is a holiday let defined in law?
                            That's part of the problem, it's not. It would be based on the facts of the situation and really only matter once in court.

                            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


                              #29
                              There are two distinct things here:

                              One is that for the purpose of paragraph 9 of schedule 1 to the HA 1988 the sole question to be asked is whether the property was let for a holiday. How many properties the tenant has, what time he spends in any of them and where his main residence is are all irrelevant.

                              The other is that, apart from all the cases set out in schedule 1, section 1 provides that a tenancy is an assured tenancy if and so long as three conditions are fulfilled, one of which is that the tenant occupies the property as his only or main home. To determine whether at any given time the condition is fulfilled enquiry needs to be made as to whether the tenant in fact occupies the property as his only or main residence and in that respect what other properties the tenant owns or occupies and how much time he spends in them may be relevant.

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X