Section 21 Date confirmation - worried landlord!

[lotuschap]

I issued an 6 month fixed term AST tenancy starting on 11 May.

With that tenancy agreement I issued a section 21 as part of the document pack - (which was signed by the tenant) giving notice to leave the property on 11 November, the end of the fixed term.

Am I correct that the tenancy legally runs from 11 May to 10 November under a 6 month fixed term - so the section 21 date is valid as requiring possession on 11th November? As on the 11th it would become a periodic tenancy.

Does the 6 month agreement in fact run from 11 May to 11 November - which invalidates the section 21 as I should have dated it 12th November.

Regards

John

[emwithme]

Had you protected the tenant's deposit and served the Prescribed Information before you issued the s21? If not, it's invalid because of that.

[lotuschap]

There was no deposit.

[thesaint]

What date was the Sec 21 served?

Your dates on the Sec 21 are fine.

[lotuschap]

Thanks,

The tenancy agreement was actually issued on 1st May to commence on the 11th May. The section 21 was issued with the tenancy agreement. I wonder if that would be an issue somehow?

Am I correct that the tenancy does run from 11th to 10th, and not 11th to 11th?

[thesaint]

Thanks,

The tenancy agreement was actually issued on 1st May to commence on the 11th May. The section 21 was issued with the tenancy agreement. I wonder if that would be an issue somehow?

I would expect it to be invalid. You served a Sec 21 way before the tenancy even began.
It's simply bad practice doing what you have done. You had 4 months to serve a Sec 21, and still keep the same expiry date for it.

[lotuschap]

They didn't though sign the tenancy agreement until the 11th when they moved in, and with it was the section 21, it was issued on the 1st for their inspection.

This appears to be a pre-requisite in the N5B, "before the tenancy began) a notice in writing, stating that the tenancy was to be an assured shorthold tenancy, was served on the defendant(s)."

Its all rather confusing!

[thesaint]

This appears to be a pre-requisite in the N5B, "before the tenancy began) a notice in writing, stating that the tenancy was to be an assured shorthold tenancy, was served on the defendant(s)."

I see no such statement.

[lotuschap]

Really! - section 3 C (the OR part) - have an got an old form perhaps?

[thesaint]

http://hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.u.../n005b-eng.pdf

[lotuschap]

That is the same form I'm using - am I filling the wrong bit in

[Snorkerz]

You are not filling the wrong bit in, you are misunderstanding the question!

However, I agree that the s21 was invalid if served before the tenancy commenced (11th). It is a basic of tenancy (and contract) law that you can not serve notice to end a 'contract' that does not exist at that stage.

A s21 should be a straightforward claim without a hearing. I am certain that if the tenant were to defend on this basis there would at least be a hearing (delaying things) if the s21 wasn't found invalid with the application.