Tenant's wife changed locks and refused to hand over key to letting agent

[Hudson01]

I think that's more likely to scare her into calling the police, but to be honest it could just as easily go the way you describe.

I agree, she may well call the Police...... when she returns, but the important thing is, she is OUTSIDE.

Now i can pretty much guarantee this - When the 3 years in PC comes to the door after the frantic 999 call, he or she will know practically zero about all the legislation surrounding AST's and how they end, so as long as the OP has all the necessary ' blurb' written down ready to hand to the PC then i see no problem, they just have to be advised to speak with their duty inspector and i woudl say all is good.

[KTC]

She is occupying the house unlawfully, as she is not named on your contract. .I do not think this will be resolved quickly.

Unless the divorce is finalised, which is not the impression I got reading OP's post, no she's not.

She may be a squatter or an unauthorised occupier

Unless the divorce is finalised, which is not the impression I got reading OP's post, no she's not. And as jpkeates said, not a squatter in any case.

Better to let the husband know that his notice will not be valid if vacant possession is not supplied and all keys returned, and that the tenancy will not end and he will remain liable for rent. He will have given notice but not departed -- it is hardly up to the landlord to act as a spy to determine who is living there, and it may in fact be the husband.

He gave presumingly a valid notice to quit. The tenancy will end. He is not holding over. He wife is. I don't see how he is liable for either rent or mesne profits. One can argue losses from the lack of vacant possession, but I would suggest it's the wife that would be liable for that.

[AndrewDod]

He gave presumingly a valid notice to quit. The tenancy will end. He is not holding over. He wife is. I don't see how he is liable for either rent or mesne profits. One can argue losses from the lack of vacant possession, but I would suggest it's the wife that would be liable for that.

I'm not 100% sure I buy this. It must be at least mesne. If one forgets the wife, if he was just a standalone tenant, gave notice and failed to leave (left stuff behind and failed to hand over keys giving L free right of entry) he would remain liable for rent. I can't see that the wife makes any difference to that, or how L would even determine that he has left (or even has to do that).

[AndrewDod]

As an aside, what is to stop the OP simply moving into the house (to live) possibly with the wife (and a few mates) once the husband has left?

[bombata]

Just to update this threat!

My worst nightmare has come through. It is the end of the tenancy and the tenant's wife has informed me that she failed to secure shelter for her and her kid. She has no other choice than to stay in the house.

I have a new family moving in next week who is now homeless.

I am checking out my legal protection for my landlord insurance if I can use them to help me with the eviction process.

[jpkeates]

I have a new family moving in next week who is now homeless.

I'd investigate the most cost effective way of housing them, as they're going to be entitled to compensation from you for any losses they incur as a result of your breach of contract.

I'd speak to a solicitor as soon as possible to start the process of excluding the woman and her child.

It's been nearly a month since this thread began, so it's a little late to be checking your insurance now.

[AndrewDod]

Why not do as I suggested earlier and move into the house yourself with some mates.
It is not clear to me what legislation prevents that, given (without re-reading the whole thread) she is not a tenant.

[bombata]

I could not start legal proceedings earlier, as the tenancy agreement was not up yet.
I live abroad, so cannot just swing by the property myself.
Thankfully the new AST has not been signed yet so the new tenants cannot claim for compensation but I do feel for them.

[DoricPixie]

I could not start legal proceedings earlier, as the tenancy agreement was not up yet.
I live abroad, so cannot just swing by the property myself.
Thankfully the new AST has not been signed yet so the new tenants cannot claim for compensation but I do feel for them.

It is perhaps a bit premature to say that these people cannot claim for compensation. If they believe they are moving into this property next week there must have been some kind of agreement with them. Were they sent a copy of the tenancy agreement and it’s just you who hadn’t signed it?

You need proper, paid for, legal advice about how to get the occupants out the property as the situation appears to be a minefield.

[jpkeates]

I could not start legal proceedings earlier, as the tenancy agreement was not up yet.

It's academic now, but it's not proceedings you needed to start it was preparing to act.

I live abroad, so cannot just swing by the property myself.

Fair enough.

Thankfully the new AST has not been signed yet so the new tenants cannot claim for compensation but I do feel for them.

If the prospective tenants sign an agreement that you sent them, unless the agreement says it is only complete when you counter-sign it, the agreement is made.

[bombata]

It's academic now, but it's not proceedings you needed to start it was preparing to act.
Fair enough.

If the prospective tenants sign an agreement that you sent them, unless the agreement says it is only complete when you counter-sign it, the agreement is made.

The TA is not valid, as the new tenants have to go into the agency to sign the contract in person. They are asking their current landlord for an extension. They are lovely and are really understanding.

I have been talking to the NRLA advice line, and they said I need to evict the husband (the actual) tenant rather than her because he cannot give us vacant possession of the property. I need to submit a N5 and a N119 form. Not sure if I should do it through my legal insurance because that might slow things down.

[AndrewDod]

I have been talking to the NRLA advice line, and they said I need to evict the husband (the actual) tenant rather than her because he cannot give us vacant possession of the property.

Yup that's what I said all along.

Otherwise you move in to the place as shared occupants - or get someone else to do so (if you decide husband's tenancy is not ongoing)

[Lawcruncher]

I have been talking to the NRLA advice line, and they said I need to evict the husband (the actual) tenant rather than her because he cannot give us vacant possession of the property.

I think you need to ask the NRLA to review their opinion. Eviction is the process of expelling someone from a property. How can you expel the husband if he has already left?

I suppose you could sue the husband for failing to give vacant possession, but that action will not get the wife out. The husband has no legal standing to evict the wife because he has no right to possession now that the tenancy has ended.

I have to agree with what KTC said:

"He gave presumingly a valid notice to quit. The tenancy will end. He is not holding over. He wife is. I don't see how he is liable for either rent or mesne profits. One can argue losses from the lack of vacant possession, but I would suggest it's the wife that would be liable for that."

You need to sue the wife for possession on the basis that she has no legal right to remain in the property.

[jpkeates]

If the wife has no right to be there, they're in exactly the same position as a joint tenant who's holding over after the end of the tenancy, and Shelter's view is that they can be removed with out a possession claim - as they're a trespasser.
I'm not sure that's easy in practice, but it is what they say.

And the possession claim is to remove a trespasser, so the process should be quicker (which isn't the same as quick given the court system's current state).

[AndrewDod]

If the wife has no right to be there, they're in exactly the same position as a joint tenant who's holding over after the end of the tenancy, and Shelter's view is that they can be removed with out a possession claim - as they're a trespasser.
I'm not sure that's easy in practice, but it is what they say.

Landlord or friends of landlord move in.