Notice requiring possession

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

  • Notice requiring possession

    Hi all,

    We have just recieved today a notice requiring possession of the porperty we are living in at the moment. We moved in last August (2008) after choosing the property through an agent. We do not understand why we have been given this notice, we pay the rent on time, we pass the house is inspected every 3 months.

    Are we entitled to know why this notice has all of a sudden been issued?

  • #2
    Hi,
    As far as i know they do not have to give a reason, for giving you the notice. i was given one in Feb 2009. i know how you feel.

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks neiljones, yeah gutted absolutely!!!

      Comment


      • #4
        Sometimes landlords issue the notice so, if there is a problem in the future, they do not have to issue one then, because they have already issued it and allowed the 2 month period to pass, they can then go straight on to court action. They do not have to give a reason. It is important that you know it is not a notice to quit, but merely tells you the landlord will require possession after a particular date.

        Or your landlord may want to move back in.

        Why not ask him, you have nothing to lose.
        I offer no guarantee that anything I say is correct. wysiwyg

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by recap View Post
          We have just recieved today a notice requiring possession of the porperty we are living in at the moment. We moved in last August (2008) after choosing the property through an agent. We do not understand why we have been given this notice, we pay the rent on time, we pass the house is inspected every 3 months.

          Are we entitled to know why this notice has all of a sudden been issued?
          What Notice form is it? Does it mention any of the following sections of the Housing Act 1988?
          s.8
          s.21(1)(b)*
          s.21(4)(a)*
          *- in these cases, did L protect your AST deposit?
          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


          • #6
            Thank you all for replying.

            Panic over!

            There should have been a covering letter with the Section 21. The covering letter would have informed us that the agent issues these notices just to cover themselves as the tenancy agreement is coming to an end in June. It would have gone on to inform us that we will then be on a monthly agreement.

            So we do not have to move out. We can sleep happy tonight.

            Again thank you all!

            Comment


            • #7
              All's well that ends well. Ahhhh!
              Kikuyu

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by recap View Post
                Thank you all for replying.

                Panic over!

                There should have been a covering letter with the Section 21. The covering letter would have informed us that the agent issues these notices just to cover themselves as the tenancy agreement is coming to an end in June. It would have gone on to inform us that we will then be on a monthly agreement.

                So we do not have to move out. We can sleep happy tonight.

                Again thank you all!
                And the moral of this story (for LLs and letting agents) is...?
                'Pause you who read this, and think for a moment of the long chain of iron or gold, of thorns or flowers, that would never have bound you, but for the formation fo the first link on one memorable day'. Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by recap View Post
                  Thank you all for replying.

                  Panic over!

                  There should have been a covering letter with the Section 21. The covering letter would have informed us that the agent issues these notices just to cover themselves as the tenancy agreement is coming to an end in June. It would have gone on to inform us that we will then be on a monthly agreement.

                  So we do not have to move out. We can sleep happy tonight.

                  Again thank you all!
                  I'm glad to hear you don't have to move yet but do be aware that the S21 notice will remain valid as you are going to continue on a periodic tenancy. This means that you have now had your two months notice and should the landlord wish you to leave he does not need to serve you notice again. After the two months are up he can, whenever he likes even months or years later, get on with the next stage of evicting you which is to apply to court for possession. So long as you are aware of that (it's nicknamed the Sword of Damocles).

                  I would not accept this and ask for a written assurance that the S21 will not be used but I doubt they would do that as after all the S21 notice was served for a reason. Ask yourself and them why did they serve the notice, how does it just cover them and in what way? Issuing the notice just to cover themselves is placatory tosh, you do need to understand what it really means for you - if you do nothing it means your right to two months notice will be spent regardless of how good a tenant you have been.

                  Search for Damocles in the forum to find out more.
                  ~~~~~

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by mind the gap View Post
                    And the moral of this story (for LLs and letting agents) is...?
                    Tenants can be very gullible to accept that a notice is just to cover the landlord without trying to understand what it means and how exactly it covers the landlord
                    ~~~~~

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Ruth Less View Post
                      Tenants can be very gullible to accept that a notice is just to cover the landlord without trying to understand what it means and how exactly it covers the landlord
                      ? The way your answer is expressed deprives it of obvious meaning, I'm afraid. What are you on about?

                      What I meant by 'The moral of the story (for LLs) is ...' was this: Think twice before the summary service of a section 21 notice when you do not actually require possession at a particular time, as it may serve only to panic your tenants and cause ill-feeling - with or without a letter to explain that it's a 'routine' procedure. There are lots of 'routine procedures' which are nonetheless unpleasant. Like the treatment of ingrowing toenails, or having one's ears syringed.

                      However, even as I write this, I am beginning to experience something of a sense of foreboding/doom. The last thing I want is to unleash another tirade about section 21 notices, since the subject has been variously dissected (by agent46 and LC) or clubbed to death (by others) recently, and it would be good to talk about something more exciting. Like having one's ears syringed?
                      'Pause you who read this, and think for a moment of the long chain of iron or gold, of thorns or flowers, that would never have bound you, but for the formation fo the first link on one memorable day'. Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by mind the gap View Post
                        What I meant by 'The moral of the story (for LLs) is ...' was this: Think twice before the summary service of a section 21 notice when you do not actually require possession at a particular time, as it may serve only to panic your tenants and cause ill-feeling - with or without a letter to explain that it's a 'routine' procedure. There are lots of 'routine procedures' which are nonetheless unpleasant. Like the treatment of ingrowing toenails, or having one's ears syringed.


                        As you say this has been discussed to death, but I would like to say that I very much agree with the quote above. If I were a tenant, regardless of how the notice is wrapped up in cosy words, I would still see it as weakening my position.
                        I also post as Moderator2 when moderating

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by mind the gap View Post
                          ? The way your answer is expressed deprives it of obvious meaning, I'm afraid. What are you on about?

                          What I meant by 'The moral of the story (for LLs) is ...' was this: Think twice before the summary service of a section 21 notice when you do not actually require possession at a particular time, as it may serve only to panic your tenants and cause ill-feeling - with or without a letter to explain that it's a 'routine' procedure. There are lots of 'routine procedures' which are nonetheless unpleasant. Like the treatment of ingrowing toenails, or having one's ears syringed.

                          However, even as I write this, I am beginning to experience something of a sense of foreboding/doom. The last thing I want is to unleash another tirade about section 21 notices, since the subject has been variously dissected (by agent46 and LC) or clubbed to death (by others) recently, and it would be good to talk about something more exciting. Like having one's ears syringed?
                          I think the point you miss is that recap (the OP) did not know what the notice meant. The fact that you as a regular thinks it's been discussed to death is beside the point. As you well know the nature of this forum does mean the same questions get asked by new OPs and repeatedly answered by the regulars.

                          The Sword of Damocles is no exception and needs a bit of explaining. I hope the OP comes back so he (or she) understands that he will have lost the right to two months notice even though he has been a good tenant for almost a year. My aim is to inform this tenant not entertain you and by suggesting that he searches for Damocles if he wants to find out more I am directing him towards the past discussions! I do not see what less I can do except leave him in ignorance of what the Sword of Damocles means for him (and other tenants). Do you really only want information that suits you passed on? If not perhaps you can stop complaining at me as this is not the first time you have tried to stop me explaining this issue to new OPs.
                          ~~~~~

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Ruth Less View Post
                            I think the point you miss is that recap (the OP) did not know what the notice meant. The fact that you as a regular thinks it's been discussed to death is beside the point. As you well know the nature of this forum does mean the same questions get asked by new OPs and repeatedly answered by the regulars.
                            You can (and will, I am sure!) re-iterate your thoughts about section 21 notices until the cows come home, as far as I'm concerned. It's a free country. Whatever floats your boat!

                            Originally posted by Ruth Less View Post
                            The Sword of Damocles is no exception and needs a bit of explaining.
                            Yes, I think we get the message.

                            Originally posted by Ruth Less View Post
                            I hope the OP comes back so he (or she) understands that he has lost the right to two months notice even though he has been a good tenant for almost a year. My aim is to inform this tenant not entertain you
                            Don't worry, there was never any danger of your entertaining me


                            Originally posted by Ruth Less View Post
                            and by suggesting that he searches for Damocles if he wants to find out more I am directing him towards the past discussions! I do not see what less I can do except leave him in ignorance of what the Sword of Damocles means for him (and other tenants). Do you really only want information that suits you passed on? If not prehaps you can stop complining at me as this is not the first time you have tried to stop me explaining this issue to new OPs.
                            To be honest, I am almost losing the will to live over the section 21 thing. I couldn't give a monkey's cuss what you tell OPs or what you don't. The issue has been done to death recently, so perhaps we can have a break from it. There now exists a wealth of past threads, to which you have made a huge contribution, for OPs to trawl through if they wish. By the way, this is not an attempt to 'stop' you telling OPs what you think about swords of Damocles, or anything else. That would be pretty futile on an open internet forum, don't you think? Within the bounds of decency, you are free to post what you want. Only the Mods can stop you posting anything.

                            The point I was making in response to your post (#10), was that it made very little sense. As a seasoned interpreter of nonsense, even I could not decode your meaning. I think it may have been due to your use of the word 'gullible'. Or something. (Tearing out hair) I DON'T CARE ANY MORE!
                            'Pause you who read this, and think for a moment of the long chain of iron or gold, of thorns or flowers, that would never have bound you, but for the formation fo the first link on one memorable day'. Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by mind the gap View Post
                              You can (and will, I am sure!) re-iterate your thoughts about section 21 notices until the cows come home, as far as I'm concerned. It's a free country. Whatever floats your boat!

                              Understatement of the century!

                              Don't worry, there was never any danger of your entertaining me




                              To be honest, I am almost losing the will to live over the section 21 thing. I couldn't give a monkey's cuss what you tell OPs or what you don't. The issue has been done to death recently., so perhaps we can have a break from it. There now exists a wealth of past threads, to which you have made a huge contribution, for OPs to trawl through if they wish.

                              The point I was making in repsonse to your post was that it made very little sense. As a seasoned interpreter of nonsense, even I could not decode your meaning. I think it may have been due to your use of the word 'gullible'. Or something. (Tearing out hair) I DON'T CARE ANY MORE!
                              Look the OP has just had a Sword of Damocles imposed, it is on topic for this thread. I really do not see what your problem is. The root is that the OP didn't read those other threads as happens often here. OPs tend to drop in and ask a specific question and then leave, it is the nature of the forum and happens all the time. I do not think answering these OPs is wrong.
                              ~~~~~

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X