Acceptance of notice to quit

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

    #16
    If I was being really pedantic, where does the law stand on noticifation by text/email. I know the Housing act specifies notice in writing, but does it define what constitutes "writing"?

    And as for references, these have been provided already, hence our confusion over the claim he is unaware we are leaving!

    Comment


      #17
      I think if the LL is offering the property with vacant possession as from April, it is good evidence that LL has accepted oral/texted notice, even if he claims he didn't receive the written notice. Either that or it's evidence of accepting T's offer to surrender.

      Originally posted by gustave View Post
      we could claim he's preventing our enjoyment of the property be expecting us to facilitate almost daily viewings, and therefore in breach of the lease!
      As Snorkerz says, you could always refuse viewings. Also, your contract may say that LL is permitted to carry out viewings in the last month of the tenancy.

      Comment


        #18
        How did the landlord ask for the notice to be "in writing" following the SMS?

        In addition to the issue of whether a SMS counts as "in writing" or not, in my view the fact that the landlord advertises the property as available from April is a good indication that he accepted the notice.
        Hence, I'd follow bhaal's advice.

        Comment


          #19
          [QUOTE=gustave;292428]If I was being really pedantic, where does the law stand on noticifation by text/email. I know the Housing act specifies notice in writing, but does it define what constitutes "writing"?[quote]

          As a LL, I would not attempt to enforce anything based on a text/email unless I had a proof of reading and proof that the addy was given to me by the T as a valid form of contact, but that is because I know damn well that a Court may well interpret *any* chink of it being only 99% proof as a reason to ignore the provided evidence. That is just how this area of law seems to work.

          Having been on the receiving end of some 'abuse of receipt of letters' when they had specifically been delivered by hand *and* via proven mail, I would probably by habit be a stickler unless there was a very good reason not to be.

          I think you would need to show that the text/email was received and read, and convince the judge.

          If a text is OK, LL could just as easily claim that you had texted again withdrawing it. Without evidence it is all down to he said/she said. We are in a bureaucratic style culture, and we all have to get used to it and the associated costs.

          One area where there will be huge fun in receipt of emails soon is because certain Councils (eg Oxford) are going "electronic only" with serving some LL notices as a money saving measure. As these can potentially involve punishment costs of £00s of LLs if get stuff wrong they will be challenged. It will not save money.

          ML
          Refer Mad Regulators to Arkell vs Pressdram.

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by midlandslandlord View Post
            If a text is OK, LL could just as easily claim that you had texted again withdrawing it.
            If true, this would be also the case for a letter.
            It is straightforward to prove that a text was sent and to prove its content. In my view this is more than what can be proven using a standard letter with a proof of postage (as cannot prove content).
            That said, I do not know the legal/case law position on texts...

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by jjlandlord View Post
              If true, this would be also the case for a letter.
              I seem to remember from somewhere that notice, once given and accepted, cannot be withdrawn. Anyone else seen this?
              I offer no guarantee that anything I say is correct. wysiwyg

              Comment


                #22
                Once a valid notice to quit has been served it will take effect. It cannot be unilaterally withdrawn. Theoretically, the landlord cannot agree it will be withdrawn, but if he purports to do so then that is tantamount to agreeing a new tenancy.

                To be valid a notice to quit only needs to be properly served, it does not need to be "accepted". Quite different is whether the landlord acting as if he had received a notice to quit is evidence that the notice to quit was received and therefore served. That is a question of evidence that a court will rule on.

                Unfortunately the law is such that whilst you can prove you sent a letter, there is no formal system for proving what was in the letter. If the service of a notice is important the best you can do is to get a solicitor to serve it for you. Quite apart from (hopefully!) ensuring the notice is correct, it is very difficult to persuade a court that a solicitor (who is an officer of the court) did not serve a notice if he said he did.

                Comment


                  #23
                  Originally posted by jta View Post
                  I seem to remember from somewhere that notice, once given and accepted, cannot be withdrawn. Anyone else seen this?
                  Yes, but that was not the issue ;-)

                  Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post
                  Unfortunately the law is such that whilst you can prove you sent a letter, there is no formal system for proving what was in the letter.
                  Yes. Actually it is easier to prove what was in a text message.
                  Could a text be acceptable as NTQ?

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Originally posted by jjlandlord View Post
                    Could a text be acceptable as NTQ?
                    Not sure if the law has caught up with text messaging yet.

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post
                      Not sure if the law has caught up with text messaging yet.
                      They are getting there. A Judge has just allowed a solicitor to use Facebook to serve a summons according to the Telegraph of 14 March.

                      Comment

                      Latest Activity

                      Collapse

                      Working...
                      X