"Landlord may re-enter and take possession after 14 days of arrears" - ???

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

    "Landlord may re-enter and take possession after 14 days of arrears" - ???

    Elsewhere I noticed this exchange posted today:

    Originally posted by cyprus View Post
    The contract which i issue has a clause in it which states that :- in the event of any rent being in arrears for at least 14 days whether expressly demanded or not , the landlord may re enter and take possession of the premises and terminate this agreement without prejudice to his rights
    Originally posted by mariner View Post
    The 14 day clause you quote is a legal artefact of no use to you.
    My own contract has this clause, and I've routinely seen it in my kids' tenancy agreements, and I'm well aware it doesn't do what it says on the tin. What actually is it for and why is it included in tenancy agreements?

    #2
    If you don't specify such a clause then you can't use Section 8, Grounds 8,10 or 11 to regain possession. It doesn't prejudice the tenant's rights for the necessity to obtain a court order for repossession as you know.

    It's commonly known as a "forfeiture" clause.
    The advice I give should not be construed as a definitive answer, and is without prejudice or liability. You are advised to consult a specialist solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

    Comment


      #3
      I understood it was there to be used should the tenant move out (say disappear or sublet..), therefore tenancy no longer AST, to use in the then non-S8-or-S21 eviction process..

      I would be surprised if it related to S8 evictions...

      Cheers!
      I am legally unqualified: If you need to rely on advice check it with a suitable authority - eg a solicitor specialising in landlord/tenant law...

      Comment


        #4
        It is included because without it the tenancy cannot be forfeited. We can immediately go on to say that a landlord's right to forfeit is severely restricted by statute, especially where the tenancy is residential and the tenant is in occupation. However, if the tenant is not in occupation then (a) the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 does not apply and (b) and part 1 of the HA 1988 does not apply so a section 8 notice will be of no effect. That means you are back with the common law and cannot forfeit unless the terms of the tenancy allow it.

        Further, though the clause quoted refers only to non-payment of rent, the HA 1988 provides that some grounds are only available if the tenancy agreement so provides. A more usual forfeiture clause will allow for forfeiture for breach of any covenant and, where the tenant is to be an assured tenancy, for belt and braces set out the relevant grounds.

        Comment


          #5
          Thanks for thr explanation LC. Even the solic who tried to explain it to me, was unsure why.

          Comment


            #6
            Yes, thanks very much Lawcruncher (I think I get it!)

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by PaulF View Post
              If you don't specify such a clause then you can't use Section 8, Grounds 8,10 or 11 to regain possession. It doesn't prejudice the tenant's rights for the necessity to obtain a court order for repossession as you know.
              This is incorrect.
              Allow tenants to protect their own deposits. I want free money when they do it wrong

              Comment

              Latest Activity

              Collapse

              Working...
              X