Requirement to stay 3 days after Section 21 Notice

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

  • Requirement to stay 3 days after Section 21 Notice

    Hi There,

    I have been reading through and I would guess that although I am not obliged to leave until a court hearing is served, what kind of situation am I putting myself in by staying 3 days past the the Section 21 notice date.

    The situation:

    Periodic tenancy: Has been rolling for 6 months since expiration of one year assured shorthold contract

    The new property is unavailable to move in to until 3 days after the section 21 date.

    Section 21 served on the grounds of the landlord looking to sell the house. Nobody has viewed the house so I cannot believe there are people waiting.

    Have asked the estate agent who have said the landlord is unwilling to let us stay the extra few days.

    1) Would the LL be able to sue us for this minor infringement?
    2) Would staying past the section 21 date then mean that we would be liable for a full months rent as notice dates have to be in line with original moving dates?

    Thanks in advance!!

  • #2
    Originally posted by rossdisco View Post
    1) Would the LL be able to sue us for this minor infringement?
    It's not an infringement. All that could happen is that the landlord can apply to the courts for reposession of the property on that date, so (at least in theory?) the worst that could happen is that you might end up liable for the cost of that application. I think if you'd made it 100% clear that you'd be leaving 3 days after the S21 date under these circumstances, the LL would be a bit daft not to wait those 3 days to see if you did indeed leave.
    2) Would staying past the section 21 date then mean that we would be liable for a full months rent as notice dates have to be in line with original moving dates?
    Yes. But a more reasonable landlord would have just agreed to the 3 extra days pro rata, I'd have thought.

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks for the quick reply

      Originally posted by Ericthelobster View Post
      Yes. But a more reasonable landlord would have just agreed to the 3 extra days pro rata, I'd have thought.
      'Estate agent' 'Reasonable'

      Not sure how to construct a sentence with those words. Maybe 'un'

      Though as another question.

      The deposit is held by a third party. Would it not be them to deem whether it is unreasonable to demand a full months rent rather than a 3 day deduction?

      Thanks

      Comment


      • #4
        For Reference. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...iewing%29-nbsp
        Thunderbirds are go

        Comment


        • #5
          The section 21 just tells you that the LL is entitled to apply for a possession order after the expiry date. If you wish to leave having received a section 21 you still need to give notice the same as if you hadn't received one. Therefore you should give not less than one month's notice coinciding with a tenancy period.

          Am I right that you wish leave three days into a tenancy period? You will only be able to do this without paying a full month's rent if you have the landlord's agreement.

          Comment


          • #6
            Ignoring valid s21 expiry date is not an infringement, you can stay until LL gets court repo order and legally evicts with Bailiffs.
            HOWEVER, if you intend to vacate before Court order but after receiving a s21 you are required to give due Notice. For SPT, this must be served (received by LL) by expiry of one tenancy period and expires at end of next T period, when your T is terminated automatically. The T period starts on day 1 of SPT (the day after the fixed term AST expired. The period is set by frequency of rent due eg pcm but may not coincide with rent due date. Full period rent is payable for whole of notice period, even if you vacate property 3 days in. Of you stay beyond your expiry date then LL could claim 2x rent as mesne profits for each day you overstay.
            If LLs s21 expiry date is accurate, then that is the last day of a T period, so I cannot see how you can provide valid T SPT notice to vacate 3 days later, without paying full period rent or negotiating with LL.
            He may be happy to see you go 3 days later, without the hassle & cost of court repo order. Even in car parks you are obliged to pay for x hrs even if you wish to stay for much less. Renting is no different

            overkapped with Janet's concise reply.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by rossdisco View Post
              'Estate agent' 'Reasonable'
              Not sure how to construct a sentence with those words.
              Yeah - note I didn't do so!

              The deposit is held by a third party. Would it not be them to deem whether it is unreasonable to demand a full months rent rather than a 3 day deduction?
              Not at all - it's perfectly legal and above board that you should pay the full month. I just meant that if the LL was a decent bloke, then if you'd been a good tenant to him and if it didn't actually make any difference to him one way or another whether you left on Day 0 or Day 3, then as a favour he might have let you off with doing it pro rata. I've done that myself once or twice when I've been in that situation (but then I'm a reasonable landlord and a decent bloke... )

              Comment

              Latest Activity

              Collapse

              • Claiming for protected deposit
                mandm
                This is an interesting one, got me into a spin.
                Tenants signed AST but decided to leave after 6 months and 3 days (problem with moving) using the break clause in the AST. I protected the deposit using DPS (Insured) and returned the deposit minus deductions when the moved out.
                I served the...
                21-07-2017, 08:00 AM
              • Reply to Claiming for protected deposit
                MrShed
                JK - there are *some* upsides of taking a deposit. The main two for me:
                1) Regardless of what it can feel like on here, the majority of tenants do not know they can play the system in this way.
                2) There is something to be said for the mindset of a tenant who has something "invested"...
                21-07-2017, 08:19 AM
              • Discussion - GDPR and implications on landlords
                MrShed
                I've just posted something on GDPR and then wondered whether it had been discussed on here before - a quick search implies its never been mentioned.

                I thought I would raise a topic to discuss it and the implications on landlords.In effect this is a replacement of the Data Protection Act...
                20-07-2017, 15:01 PM
              • Reply to Discussion - GDPR and implications on landlords
                jpkeates
                The ICO should be fining landlords for not registering as data processors - they're not.

                The maximum amount of personal data held by landlords and agents arises out of tenant referencing, and, if that were to be destroyed after a couple of months, most landlords would arguably be pretty...
                21-07-2017, 08:16 AM
              • Reply to Claiming for protected deposit
                JK0
                I'm afraid this rant won't help you much o/p, but:

                STILL!? Still landlords are giving tenants a way to wheedle thousands out of them for no good reason?

                I have come to the conclusion this whole deposit protection nonsense is a government sponsored scam. There is barely any...
                21-07-2017, 08:12 AM
              • Reply to Claiming for protected deposit
                jpkeates
                They are probably claiming that you didn't protect the deposit and give them the Prescribed Information document, both of which you are required to do within 30 days of receipt of the deposit.

                If you didn't do both things to the appropriate deadline, you didn't protect the deposit correctly....
                21-07-2017, 08:09 AM
              • Reply to Discussion - GDPR and implications on landlords
                jjlandlord
                Source: http://news.pwc.ch/31824/gdpr-key-ch...-eu-companies/

                That being said, I don't think it will have much impact on landlords:



                I don't think that'll be the case. References are legitimate and widespread.



                ...
                21-07-2017, 07:51 AM
              • Help. Scam/ fraud letting
                Hayleydenice93
                Hiya

                i need some advise on my situation in regards to this flat offered to me and my partner. We viewed a flat which was in an old office block which had been converted into service apartments and then refurbished into flats.

                The agency we viewed the flats through did not want...
                20-07-2017, 20:59 PM
              • Reply to Help. Scam/ fraud letting
                theartfullodger
                You do not have to own a place to be the Landlord. Suspect they rent from owner (their Landlord), they then rent (as your Landlord) to you.

                Doubt there's any chance of getting proper tenancy from them. You could sign licence, move in, then try and get rights as an AST Tenant (eg sue for...
                21-07-2017, 07:46 AM
              • Claiming for Non protected deposit
                charliesugar
                This is posted on behalf of my cleaner who approached me for help after her last landlord failed to reply to her repeated requests for return of her deposit.
                She rented a room in a shared house in London, AST, weekly rent all paid on time. Notice given and accepted, room left neat and clean....
                27-06-2017, 13:18 PM
              Working...
              X