Joint tenancy implied surrender

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Joint tenancy implied surrender

    I'm writing as a tenant in a somewhat complicated situation:

    1) Joint tenancy, ended a month ago by implied surrender before the fixed-term

    2) No break clause, therefore had to find replacement tenants who pay less rent

    3) Never signed any deed of surrender etc but everything was approved by agency and landlord and I handed the keys over to the new tenants myself

    4) In our tenancy agreement we had agreed to paying the difference in rent until the end of fixed-term should the new tenancy be for a lesser rent

    5) Agency/landlord are now refusing to return our deposit unless we pay that difference in rent

    6) My co-tenant had vacated the property months before the end and was not planning to come back - it is however unclear whether agency/landlord are aware of this

    7) His tenancy was supposed to be taken over by someone else but the landlord never approved the partial change of occupancy, even though agency had completed all referencing checks

    8) I had a change of mind and decided to end the tenancy altogether - I informed him of this but not of the fact that the new tenants would be paying less

    9) Agency/landlord never asked for his approval which would imply that the surrender was not effective

    My questions:

    1) Did co-tenant have a right to have a say in the surrender?

    2) If yes, is the surrender therefore not effective?

    3) If not effective, can our tenancy be reinstated even though the property has been re-let?

    4) If this is not possible, can we still be charged for the difference in rent even though the surrender was not effective?

    Note that co-tenant and I are not on good terms because of this whole situation.

    What exactly is an "implied surrender" here.

    There is no "co-tenant" - there is only one tenant who has a say in the matter. During the fixed term a single part of the tenant cannot surrender anything.

    1. Yes
    2, Yes most likely
    3. The L may have committed a serious offense by placing a new tenant into a property which has an existing tenant (you and mate)
    4. That doesn't mean anything to me.

    It will help if you explained step by step exactly what happened, rather than placing your own interpretation and language on that and then asking us to comment.


      I agree.
      The problem with the explanation starts at 1).

      A tenant can't end a tenancy with an "implied surrender".
      A landlord can accept an implied surrender, which can end a tenancy.

      One of two joint tenants can't imply anything on their own.
      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).


        This sounds more like an undocumented express surrender, but perhaps the agent has realised that this would be invalid unless signed by both tenants and is therefore pretending that they have taken back the property because you both walked out.


        Latest Activity