Periodic Tenancy Notice

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

    Periodic Tenancy Notice

    Hi Guys

    I've looked through a few threads on here and other sites and can't find a definitive answer.

    Lease came to an end in January after 2.5 years, it didn't specify in my lease what happens when the least ends, therefore I'm under the impression it would roll onto a statutory periodic tenancy by default.

    The managing agent did email me in October to advise my lease was coming to an end, and I could go onto a periodic/rolling contract (doesn't specify statutory or contractual, or what the period is - 30 days, 1 month etc). Their email states:

    "A periodic tenancy means that if you wish to vacate the property then you will have to give us 2 months notice in writing. Please be advised that the landlord can also give you two months notice to vacate"

    I replied to say (verbatim) "Happy to go onto the rolling contract if the price stays the same", and was told I'd receive a letter in the post to confirm, which I never did.

    My question is - Am i actually committed to giving two months notice based on my reply to that email? Am I bound to a contractual periodic tenancy based on that reply? Unsure if I actually need to sign documentation, as I had done with my previous 3 contracts (Renewed twice, Original 1 year > Renewed 1 year > Renewed 6 months).

    Please note: I do not need advice that suggest court is the best option, and it just isn't an option I'm willing to explore.

    Thanks in advance.

    #2
    You should give a minimum of one month's notice ending at the end of a rental period (which you should check your tenancy agreement for).

    That's what the law says, regardless of the "advice" from the agent.
    When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
    Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

    Comment


      #3
      I offered 30 days notice to which they replied:

      "Please be advised that you are required to give two months notice from your tenancy date. Therefore if you give us your notice on or before 15th June then you will move out on 14th August"

      I'm concerned they can hold me to the two months notice given that I replied to their email saying I was happy going onto a rolling contract, albeit without physically signing anything.

      Comment


        #4
        If the term in the agreement is a fixed term, then it becomes statutory periodic and tenant notice period is set in Housing Act 1988 as one month ending on last day of rental period.

        If the term says something like "X months and continuing thereafter on a monthly basis until terminated by notice in accordance with Y", then the notice specified at Y applies (which is probably 2 months).

        Comment


          #5
          Oh, don't labour the point with the agent if you want to stay; that may prompt a S21 notice.

          Comment


            #6
            Thanks - nothing at all in my original lease specifies what happens when the lease ends It just states 12 months starting on X date. Second and third lease stated the same things - 12 months and 6 months respectively.

            My concern is more to do with the managing agents email offering a periodic tenancy at the end of my final 6 month lease, and me saying 'yes thats fine' in an email, without actually signing anything to say I agree.

            Can they hold me to the 2 months notice period because I replied to an email, or should they have asked me to sign something to say I agree to a contractual rolling period?

            Comment


              #7
              No they can't hold you to anything.

              Simply reply advising that you are certain they are aware that your tenancy is now statutory periodic, and that the notice period in law on such a tenancy is one full month ending at a rental period.

              You could not and have not signed away that legal right.

              Your rental period will be in line with your original AST not necessarily the date you pay rent which may be different. Check your dates are correct and this will allow you to serve valid notice. If you miss the full month effectively you could end up serving almost two months and then your argument is futile

              Comment


                #8
                Makes sense - thank you very much.

                Comment


                  #9
                  You are only required by law to give one rent period of notice, your landlord must give you two months.
                  I offer no guarantee that anything I say is correct. wysiwyg

                  Comment


                    #10
                    seems worrying that the agent doesn't know the law though ..... I wonder how many other errors have been, or will be made ?

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by rfph1 View Post
                      seems worrying that the agent doesn't know the law though .....
                      What makes you think the agent doesn't know the law?

                      Comment


                        #12
                        I think the agent is well aware of the law. They are just trying their luck.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by JSPEN View Post
                          I'm concerned they can hold me to the two months notice given that I replied to their email saying I was happy going onto a rolling contract, albeit without physically signing anything.
                          I'm sure that the agent did not intend to grant a new tenancy, but to advise that a statutory periodic tenancy would automatically arise.

                          However, if they do claim that you agreed to a new contractual periodic tenancy, then it is a tenancy with no written terms (which is bad for the landlord), and in particular there are no terms identifying when your deposit can be retained by the landlord, so you would be entitled to a full refund of the deposit when you vacate.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by MdeB View Post
                            However, if they do claim that you agreed to a new contractual periodic tenancy, then it is a tenancy with no written terms (which is bad for the landlord), and in particular there are no terms identifying when your deposit can be retained by the landlord, so you would be entitled to a full refund of the deposit when you vacate.
                            That's a huge stretch because (1) terms would likely be implied to be the same as the previous tenancy, (2) terms regarding the deposit must be written down in the prescribed information, (3) terms in general may be implied.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by jjlandlord View Post
                              (1) terms would likely be implied to be the same as the previous tenancy
                              I don't see why "likely"; I would accept "possibly".

                              Originally posted by jjlandlord View Post
                              (2) terms regarding the deposit must be written down in the prescribed information
                              This was discussed recently in another thread (sorry, I do not have reference to hand), and it was pointed out that the prescribed information order para 2(g)(vi) states
                              the circumstances when all or part of the deposit may be retained by the landlord, by reference to the terms of the tenancy

                              the important phrase being by reference.
                              So no written agreement = no reference to terms = no deposit deductions.

                              Originally posted by jjlandlord View Post
                              (3) terms in general may be implied
                              Terms that are required by statute or implied by common law, yes.

                              Any other implied terms would (imo) be from conversations (of which there appear to be none) or written communications (admittedly we do not have the full text of any such communications)

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X