Can L serve more than one s.21 Notice on T?

[Johnybon]

After my L told me that he will extend my contract for 6 month more he told me 2 days ago that i have to move.


My contract ended 30 june 2009 (AST)

1. My landlord serviced me one section 21 notice on 29 june 2009 with a date of expire on 31 august 2009. Section 21(4)(a), Deposit wasnt protected in that date. No recorded delivery.

2. My landlord serviced me another section 21 notice on 30 june 2009 with a date expire of on 31 august 2009. Section 21(4)(a), . No recorded delivery.

I want to know if those notices are correct or invalid (?)

How many section 21 notices can a L service to a T ?

I think he will try to give me another one. He can give me more section 21 notices?

Thank you

[David TFP]

If your fixed term notice ended the 30 June 2009, then the landlord should not have used a section 21(4) notice at all but notice under section 21(1) (you were still a fixed term tenant the day the notice was served.

He can now serve another notice (should now be 21(4) as you are, as of today, a periodic tenant) but the notice must be at least two months long and expire at the end of a period of the tenancy (probably nearly 3 months away now).

He can serve as many notices as he needs to till he gets it right!

There is no legally prescribed requirement for him to serve by recorded delivery, but it may be a contractual obligation, you don't say.

[SALL]

If your deposit is not protected then all section 21 notices would be invalid.
But what do you want to achieve from your question? If your LL wants the property back, he will get it sooner or later. You might be able to drag it out for a few months, but at the end of the day you will have to move.
If the deposit is unprotected, then request your LL to return it or protect it. If he doesn’t, you can sue for 3 x the deposit.

[Johnybon]

what about the deposit ? he did not protect in all this time.

He told me on 29 june i will do tomorrow 30 of june. He serviced me yerstarday 30 of june the second section 21 notice and maybe he has protected it now but he did not give any info about if this happend. That is legal?

Thank you for you reply

[Johnybon]

If your deposit is not protected then all section 21 notices would be invalid.
But what do you want to achieve from your question? If your LL wants the property back, he will get it sooner or later. You might be able to drag it out for a few months, but at the end of the day you will have to move.
If the deposit is unprotected, then request your LL to return it or protect it. If he doesn’t, you can sue for 3 x the deposit.

My point is as he did not tell me i had to leave before monday, i did not plain to leave and now i am going to go to holidays.

[David TFP]

He will need to give you 2 months' notice (minimum) after he has protected the deposit Also he must give you "prescribed information" about where the deposit is held and he cannot use a section 21 notice till this is done (Housing Act 2004 S215(2)).

[Johnybon]

He can serve as many notices as he needs to till he gets it right!

.

Are you sure ?

Because how he can proof that the notice that he is going to give me "tomorrow" will be a diferent one than the others i already have. He did not send them by recorderd delivery so i can say that in that "recorded letter" that i am going to get "tomorrow" i ve got the invalid one. So how he prof he serviced me with the correct one ?

if a landlord can send more that one section 21 notice, the only thing he needs is a recorded delivery in his pocket to say he sent it.

Than you

[SALL]

Are you sure ?

Because how he can prof that the notice that he is going to give me "tomorrow" will be a diferent one than the others i already have. He did not send them by recorderd delivery so i can say that in that "recorded letter" that i am going to get "tomorrow" i ve got the invalid one. So how he prof he serviced me with the correct one ?

if a landlord can send more that one section 21 notice, the only thing he needs is a recorded delivery in his pocket to say he sent it.

Than you

Well that's your choice, if you are happy to perjure yourself.

BTW there is a thing called certificate of postage. If the LL used that than he has proof that he sent you the letter on a certain date.

[Johnybon]

Well that's your choice, if you are happy to perjure yourself in court.

I am not speaking about perjure, i am speaking about logic. i understad you get the position of my landlord but i want to get the logic of that process.

If i give to the judge the others notices too how the judge can be sure that he serviced me with the correct (?)


"BTW there is a thing called certificate of postage. If the LL used that than he has proof that he sent you the letter on a certain date"

ok perfect, i know that, but how to proof what there is in that letter he sent that day ?! I can say that there was the wrong section 21 notice he already serviced me.

Actualy, if a landlord can send a lot of section 21 notice, he only needs to send a empty letter certificated.

[SALL]

I am not speaking about perjure, i am speaking about logic. i understad you get the position of my landlord but i want to get the logic of that process.

If i give to the judge the others notices too how the jugge can be sure which one was the correct (?)

Showing all the notices to the judge only makes the LL position stronger.

Say LL has served 3 notices, 2 invalid and one valid.

You would claim - LL served notices in this order - invalid - Valid - Invalid

LL will claim - that he made mistakes on the first two notices and as soon as he realised he sent another valid notice.

Now logically which claim makes more sense?

Anyway, as long as LL serves one valid notice, it doesn’t matter how many invalid one’s he has sent you. The fact is, your LL gave you proper notice to vacate the property.

[SALL]

I am not speaking about perjure, i am speaking about logic. i understad you get the position of my landlord but i want to get the logic of that process.

If i give to the judge the others notices too how the judge can be sure which one was the correct (?)


"BTW there is a thing called certificate of postage. If the LL used that than he has proof that he sent you the letter on a certain date"

ok perfect, i know that, but how to prof what there is in that letter he sent that day ?! I can say that there was the wrong section 21 notice he already serviced me.

Do you know what perjury is?

[Johnybon]

Showing all the notices to the judge only makes the LL position stronger.

Say LL has served 3 notices, 2 invalid and one valid.

You would claim - LL served notices in this order - invalid - Valid - Invalid

LL will claim - that he made mistakes on the first two notices and as soon as he realised he sent another valid notice.

Now logically which claim makes more sense?

Anyway, as long as LL serves one valid notice, it doesn’t matter how many invalid one’s he has sent you. The fact is, your LL gave you proper notice to vacate the property.

No.... that is not the case i am speaking. The point is the landlord cant proof what he puts in the letter he is certificanting with the correct notice. And i have notices invalied from him.

I dont need show ANY valid notice to the Judge, i just say i got "this one" in that letter he has certificated (a invalid one he sent me before)

[johnboy]

Yes and if i was the landlord i would say "yes i did serve 3 s21 and the first two were incorrect and the last one served was this one and here is the proof of service to which the dates match the correct s21"

Why would judge believe a landlord sent 2 incorrect s21 and then send a empty envolope the third time? I think you could end up looking very foolish in court.

But if the deposit hasnt been protected the third one will be invalid as well.

[Johnybon]

Do you know what perjury is?

Yes, perjury is when u are not saying the truth to the judge, cos the people lie to much, and this is why the judge need more that words, they need proofs.

And the landlord need to proof he proviced me with a correct section 21 notice. Its not enought with his word.

He could "perjury" too if he says he sent me that notice 3 months ago when he was sending me... the new key that i lost.

But ok, i can see you u dont want to get the logical point because u dont like that conclutions.

[SALL]

No.... that is not the case i am speaking. The point is the landlord cant proof what he puts in the letter he is certificanting with the correct notice. And i have notices invalied from him.

I dont need show ANY valid notice to the Judge, i just say i got "this one" in that letter he has certificated (a invalid one he sent me before)

So basically you would lie. Just look at it logically.

Notice 1 - Your LL shows proof that he sent a notice.
Notice was invalid.
Notice 2 - Your LL shows proof that he sent a notice.
Notice was invalid.
Notice 3 - Your LL shows proof that he sent a notice.
Notice is valid.

You will claim all notices were invalid. (If you show all invalid notices, LL has proof of postage for one extra (the valid) notice; do you also plan to forge a notice?)

LL will show proof of service for 3 notices and claim the last one is valid.

If there is a period of 2 months (notice required by law) between the date of postage and the date LL starts court proceedings. There is no logical reason for the LL to send you an empty envelope.

Thinking of it completely logically, who do you think the judge should believe?