Incorrect AST signed?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Incorrect AST signed?

    At the top of the AST I have signed it states that its an AST for a Furnished Property. I don’t think the property is actually furnished as only a built in cooker and hob is provided along with blinds at all the windows, the rest of the furniture and appliances are mine. I am just a little worried that the tenancy agreement isn’t valid as the Landlord should have provided me with an AST for a none furnished property. Am I worrying about nothing or is this in fact the wrong kind of contract for this property?

    Any help would be appreciated.

    Mine is the same and when I looked it up somewhere (can't remember where) I was under the impression it really doesn't make much difference to the validity of the contract itself.

    The really important bit is the inventory which should have stated what, if any, furniture and fittings are in the property and what condition they were handed over to you in.

    As it is "part furnished" (with built in cooker and hob, blinds etc) they may have just used the furnished contract for ease ?
    Any information or opinion given in this post is based only on my personal experience, what I have learned from this, other boards and elsewhere. It is not to be relied on. Definitive advice is only available from a Solicitor or other appropriately qualified person. E&OE


      There is no set definition of what constitutes a furnished or unfurnished property. The guidance below from Inland Revenue is however helpful

      The legal rights of the landlord are the same whichever option is chosen. However, if the property is not furnished or a tenant requests an unfurnished property, carpets, curtains, light fittings and a fitted kitchen (including a cooker) and bathroom should be provided.

      For a furnished property the tenant would expect to find kitchen appliances (such as fridge/freezer, washing machine, microwave, kettle, crockery and cooking utensils), beds with sufficient linen , a three-piece suite, table and chairs, wardrobes, a vacuum cleaner and an iron and ironing board. They would not expect to find personal effects or ornaments, antiques or the family pet. It is the landlord’s responsibility to store safely any items that are not required.

      The landlord is more likely to want the property described as furnished for tax purposes so as to claim a fair wear and tear allowance.

      The 10% deduction is given to cover the sort of machinery and plant assets that a tenant or owner-occupier would normally provide in unfurnished accommodation. These are things like:

      movable furniture or furnishings, such as beds or suites,
      fridges and freezers,
      carpets and floor-coverings,
      crockery or cutlery,
      machinery and plant chattels of a type which, in unfurnished accommodation, a tenant would normally provide for himself (for example, cookers, washing machines, dishwashers).
      This list isn’t meant to be complete but gives an idea of the assets the wear and tear allowances covers.

      See HMRC Furnished Residential Properties: Wear and Tear Allowances
      Vic - wicked landlord
      Any advice or suggestions given in my posts are intended for guidance only and not a substitute for completing full searches on this forum, having regard to the advice of others, or seeking appropriate professional opinion.
      Without Plain English Codes of Practice and easy to complete Prescribed Forms the current law is too complex and is thus neither fair to good tenants nor good landlords.


        Thankyou for your responses.


          As Pippay says, the key thing is the inventory; it doesn't matter about the AST document. I assume your AST probably contains stuff relating to any furnishings/contents provided by the landlord - well, that includes window and floor coverings and any appliances, which would explain why he's used an AST for 'furnished property'.

          Is there an inventory? Certainly should be; but if not that is still the landlord's problem not yours - eg if when you eventually quit the property the landlord were to say "you've stolen all my furniture - look the AST says 'furnished', so you owe me £5000!" he would have to provide evidence of this in the form of an inventory originally signed off by you.

          Originally posted by Worldlife
          The landlord is more likely to want the property described as furnished for tax purposes so as to claim a fair wear and tear allowance.
          As also stated in the link Worldlife provided: "The provision of nominal furnishings will not meet this requirement. If the accommodation isn’t furnished, or only partly furnished, the 10% wear and tear allowance isn’t due." so that shouldn't actually make any difference!


          Latest Activity