Notice To End Fixed Term

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

    Notice To End Fixed Term

    I understand that a tenant does not need to give notice to vacate at the expiry of the fixed term but I seem to remember reading in the forum somewhere (that I now can't find) that a clause could be added to the tenancy agreement requiring that a tenant gives, e.g. 1 month notice, that they wish to vacate the premises at the end of the fixed term.

    Is this correct or did I imagine it?

    #2
    You can add any term you like to a contract. Doesn't make it enforceable.

    The LL and the T are given notice upon signing of the contract that there is an end date. Frankly, it is a very poorly run business by a LL if a, they don't understand some simple principles of contract law and b, can't be bothered to ask a T what their plans are as the end date of the contract.
    There is always scope for misinterpretation.

    If my posts can be interpreted in two ways, one that makes you feel angry and one that doesn't, I meant the latter.

    Everyday is an opportunity to learn something new.

    Comment


      #3
      It's an interesting point:

      I think tenant does not need to give notice to leave tenancy before end of fixed term: (Note: TENANCY). But if the tenancy CONTRACT (note, CONTRACT) says notice must be given to end fixed term and none is given then there may be a breach-of-contract issue landlord could sue for.

      See, surprisingly, our friends over here...
      http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_ad...term_agreement
      Leaving at the end of your fixed term

      You can normally leave on the last day of your fixed-term agreement without giving your landlord notice.

      Check to see if your tenancy agreement says you must give notice and how much you must give. You must give notice if it says something like:

      you must tell your landlord if you plan to leave on the last day
      when the fixed term expires the tenancy will continue as a periodic tenancy

      You should let your landlord know what you plan to do to avoid disputes.

      afaik there is no test case... (and hope there won't be..)
      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
        Originally posted by mk1fan View Post
        You can add any term you like to a contract. Doesn't make it enforceable.

        The LL and the T are given notice upon signing of the contract that there is an end date. Frankly, it is a very poorly run business by a LL if a, they don't understand some simple principles of contract law and b, can't be bothered to ask a T what their plans are as the end date of the contract.
        I don't see the point in this reply. There is no useful or helpful information to take away from it.
        You know nothing about the situation and are making inaccurate assumptions and insinuations without at least asking for clarification.
        If all landlords were as expert as you imply you are then there would be no reason for this forum.
        Malevolent and sanctimonious replies do not benefit anyone reading this forum looking for help and advice.

        Comment


          #5
          A pointless reply bemoaning a (in the posters opinion) pointless reply.

          The irony.
          There is always scope for misinterpretation.

          If my posts can be interpreted in two ways, one that makes you feel angry and one that doesn't, I meant the latter.

          Everyday is an opportunity to learn something new.

          Comment


            #6
            I always thought that a clause could not be added if it contradicted the law, and if the law states they can leave without notice then I would have previously thought it was unenforceable.

            However, given how strict shelter usually are, and that they tend to favour the tenant, then I'm thinking if they advise otherwise, them I could well be wrong.

            I have yet to have a tenant that wasn't evicted and didn't advise of their intentions though. How common is it for a tenant to up and leave without a word when AST expires?

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by theartfullodger View Post
              It's an interesting point:

              I think tenant does not need to give notice to leave tenancy before end of fixed term: (Note: TENANCY). But if the tenancy CONTRACT (note, CONTRACT) says notice must be given to end fixed term and none is given then there may be a breach-of-contract issue landlord could sue for.

              See, surprisingly, our friends over here...
              http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_ad...term_agreement

              afaik there is no test case... (and hope there won't be..)
              Thanks for the information. I am sure I read the same in a thread here previously.

              Good to see Shelter advising tenants to check if there is a clause requiring notice before the end of the fixed term.
              I will start adding this clause to my future contracts as at least I can point it out if I again have similar disorganised tenants as I do now that cannot make up their minds whether they are moving or not (and leaving me very little time to find replacement tenants). I know I can leave the tenancy go periodic but I would prefer to avoid that at the moment.

              Comment


                #8
                It seems like a can of worms. What would such a clause bind a party to do? What if they changed their mind? What if they were undecided?

                If the tenant leaves at the end of the fixed term, the tenancy ends. If he stays, a statutory periodic tenancy comes into being. He is perfectly free and entitled to do either. The fate of the tenancy is a consequence of what the tenant does, not his stated intention.

                If he gives notice, one way or the other - does that change anything? What and how?

                Comment


                  #9
                  There cannot be any loss resulting from failing to notify the landlord of something that was going to happen regardless...

                  A few years back there was a document on the issue by the Law Society, iirc. The conclusion was that such clause was useless.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    I think the point is Stuart that with no notice LL doesnt know whether to advertise and relet.

                    If the clause is allowed and not met it would allow landlord I assume to recover losses from the deposit or via courts.

                    It's a pretty big one for me and I will be interested to see if further guidance is given.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Apologies jjlandlord u answered my question as I wrote it!

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by jjlandlord View Post
                        There cannot be any loss resulting from failing to notify the landlord of something that was going to happen regardless...
                        It's not quite that. Yes the fixed term tenancy will end, regardless: ("I hereby give notice that at midnight on 31st inst, it will be midnight on 31st inst."); but rather that the LL is seeking to make the tenant say whether he is going to stay or to leave - with consequences. Presumably, the landlord's actions in the notice period would vary according to the tenant's stated intentions. But trying to make the T liable for the 'speculative' costs of a LL in such circumstances seems intrinsically unfair. My guess (and that's all it is) is that a test case brought by a LL would be unsuccessful.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by Wright76 View Post
                          I think the point is Stuart that with no notice LL doesnt know whether to advertise and relet.
                          Precisely.

                          Originally posted by Wright76 View Post
                          If the clause is allowed and not met it would allow landlord I assume to recover losses from the deposit or via courts.
                          I think in reality it would help in that the LL could point out to the T that notice is required by the contract for the T to leave at the end of the fixed term and this would hopefully help them hurry up and decide what they are doing rather than leaving the LL dangling.

                          I don't know if such a clause would be lawful but it would be very helpful if it were.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by ABC123 View Post
                            ... it would help in that the LL could point out to the T that notice is required by the contract for the T to leave at the end of the fixed term ...
                            I don't suppose that's really what you meant: but are you saying that such a clause would prevent the tenant leaving unless he did give notice? If that's what you want, use a contractual periodic tenancy from the start. The tenancy will go on and on until the tenant does give notice to end it. Such a provision is fundamentally contrary to the purpose of a tenancy having a fixed term. Surely?

                            Comment


                              #15
                              What would be useful would be the replace the concept of fixed terms with minimum terms, but otherwise be periodic from the start. That would require an amendment to the Housing Act, and probably couldn't be achieved by contract.

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X