My s.21 Notice was held to be invalid- help!

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

    #16
    I apologise if my wording in the above post has confused you, Bhurinder's fixed term tenancy has expired and the tenancy is now a statutory periodic and therefore a s21a was applicable rather than a S21b as it was issued during the periodic tenancy. I shall edit my post above as I mean as per Jeffrey's question that the periods ran from 14th-13th.

    I hope that clarifies things for you

    Comment


      #17
      Pedant's note: The correct references (get it right or you might lose your case!) are:
      section 21(1)(b) for Notice served DURING fixed term
      section 21(4)(a) for Notice served AFTER fixed term (i.e. during statutory periodic continuation tenancy)
      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


        #18
        There's an article worth reading by prominent barristers Gary Webber & Daniel Dovar and written about 2 to 3 years ago. It states that service of a S.21 (1)(b) Notice (in error) instead of a (4)(a) Notice for a periodic tenancy should still be valid, and argues the point well.
        The advice I give should not be construed as a definitive answer, and is without prejudice or liability. You are advised to consult a specialist solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

        Comment


          #19
          The notice that i served was a section 21 (4) (a), i dont think the issue is the type of notice that i served but the wording in the notice served. And the date periods ran from 14th-13th.

          Pls see the my second post in this thread with the corrections in red.

          Comment


            #20
            [QUOTE=bhurinder;93184]The notice that i served was a section 21 (4) (a), i dont think the issue is the type of notice that i served but the wording in the notice served. And the date periods ran from 14th-13th.
            QUOTE]

            HOUSING ACT 1988 SECTION 21 (4) (a)

            ASSURED SHORTHOLD TENANCY: NOTICE REQUIRING POSSESSION: PERIODIC TENANCY


            TO: Name of tenant

            OF: Address of rental property

            FROM: Name of landlord

            OF: Address of landlord


            I give you notice that I require possession of the dwelling house known as: Address of rental property


            AFTER: 13th August 2008


            OR ON THE LAST DAY OF A PERIOD OF THE TENANCY NEXT OCCURRING.


            Dated the: 10th June 2008.

            The judge seems to have taken exception to the above sentence in red.

            His reason for striking the case out is as follows:

            "The notice of 10th June is defective because it specifies 13th August 2008 or _the last day of a period of the tenancy next occuring. The said last day
            would have been 13th June 2008. The notice thus specifies two different dates, and does not state which is to prevail".

            Has the judge ruled harshly against me or have i made a mistake?

            Comment


              #21
              The Judge is right. Your wording "next occurring" seems literally to mean "next occurring after date of Notice".

              What you should have written is, "or on the last day of a period of the tenancy next occurring after two months from the date of this Notice"- my emphasis.
              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


                #22
                The judge has ruled harshly.
                Your notice requires possession "after the 13th of August, 2008 or on the last day of a period of the tenancy next occuring"
                The judge decided to interpret "the last day of a period of the tenancy next occuring" in relation to the date your notice was given (ie. in relation to the 10th of June). Thus he says "the said last day would have been the 13th of June". Not a very sensible interpretation to say the least.
                However being in pedantic mode, he could equally well have rejected your notice, just for offering two dates without saying which one was to prevail.
                I think strictly your notice should have included the phrase "or failing this"; to be inserted after "require possession after 13th of August, 2008"
                A sensible view of your notice, taking into account that its clear intention is to end a tenancy and that you are obviously aware of the need to give two months notice, would be that you require possession after the 13th of August but if for any reason this is not acceptable then, possession after the next (ie. after 13th August) acceptable last day of a period of the tenancy.
                In my view, the judge was lacking in common sense but as he would no doubt be pleased to tell you --- I AM THE JUDGE.

                Comment


                  #23
                  I understand both of your comments jeffery and johnjw, the S21 notice that i used was tried and tested though. Others have used this and succeeded so ive been told from reliable sources on landlord forum.

                  Comment


                    #24
                    What Bhurinder's experience shows is that whatever you may read on the internet, or indeed in a book, it is what the judge decides that is important.

                    I think there is a tendency to take a strict approach to S 21 notices simply because if the landlord gets it wrong it is not fatal - he can serve another notice.

                    Comment

                    Latest Activity

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X