Options to extend and to break- clauses inconsistent

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

    Options to extend and to break- clauses inconsistent

    I've just received a new contract from a agent which include two clauses which in my mind are contradictary.
    The first is that I have the option to break the contract by serving two months notice to expire not before the 12 month minimum term.
    The second clause is that the tenant has the option to renew the contract for the second year.
    My question is do these clauses contradict each other, and if so which clause would supersede the other.
    Thank you.

    #2
    Originally posted by googlegirl View Post
    I've just received a new contract from a agent which include two clauses which in my mind are contradictary.
    The first is that I have the option to break the contract by serving two months notice to expire not before the 12 month minimum term.
    The second clause is that the tenant has the option to renew the contract for the second year.
    My question is do these clauses contradict each other, and if so which clause would supersede the other.
    Thank you.
    Are you the landlord or the tenant?

    If you are the tenant, then the 2 clauses are not contradictory. In effect, read together, they say that you have the option to either leave early or stay longer.
    Health Warning


    I try my best to be accurate, but please bear in mind that some posts are written in a matter of seconds and often cannot be edited later on.

    All information contained in my posts is given without any assumption of responsibility on my part. This means that if you rely on my advice but it turns out to be wrong and you suffer losses (of any kind) as a result, then you cannot sue me.

    Comment


      #3
      I think that OP is a landlord.
      Clause 1 allows L to terminate lease but not during its first yesar.
      Clause 2 allows T to renew for one year more.
      Whoever serves first wins, I guess.
      However, be careful re clause 2. Would renewal be on exactly same basis (inc. this clause 2)? If so, it could be a perpetually renewable lease: see Law of Property Act 1922 for how dreadful that can be!
      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


        #4
        Originally posted by jeffrey View Post
        However, be careful re clause 2. Would renewal be on exactly same basis (inc. this clause 2)? If so, it could be a perpetually renewable lease: see Law of Property Act 1922 for how deadful that can be!
        I must admit, that thought crossed my mind, although I thought it was saved by being limited to an option to renew for a further year.

        Perpetually renewable leases converted into a term of, IIRC, 3000 years. Ouch
        Health Warning


        I try my best to be accurate, but please bear in mind that some posts are written in a matter of seconds and often cannot be edited later on.

        All information contained in my posts is given without any assumption of responsibility on my part. This means that if you rely on my advice but it turns out to be wrong and you suffer losses (of any kind) as a result, then you cannot sue me.

        Comment

        Latest Activity

        Collapse

        Working...
        X