It sounds as though the rent in advance as you call it, is actually a deposit. The only way it wouldn't have been a deposit is if you had paid the 2 months in advance when the tenancy began, and then not paid rent for 2 months after that, then monthly there onwards. Therefore, as a deposit it should be protected in a government approved scheme. If your landlord is applying under ground 8 of section 8, and as it seems you have more than 2 months rent unpaid, the judge will have no choice but to grant a possession order. He will have no discretion over this. However, the fact that your deposit probably isn't protected (you should check with the 3 schemes), could help you avoid being evicted: http://england.shelter.org.uk/forums/index.php?showtopic=237&st=0&p=573entry573

While you are having problems, check the documents you were given when you moved in, and ask the Agent for a copy of the Gas Safety Certificate. One should have been issued within the last 12 months, and if not must be done immediately to ensure the boiler and gas supply are safe. The landlord could land himself in trouble if this isn't done. If they have to send out a gas man to to the safety check, you could ask how it works and about the settings while he is there.

AFAIK, the notice is invalid, as the only notice that can be given and be valid without a reference to any law is a section 21 (1) (b), which requires a minimum of 8 weeks notice for rent payable weekly, or 2 months for rent payable monthly. What the LL may be relying on (and it is tenuous), is showing the court that it is not her 'main or principle home' which is a condition of an AST, and therefore trying to flout the legal procedures. However, this does not mean she does not have a valid tenancy and would have to be proven in court anyway! Can you confirm a few details please: When did the tenancy start? How long was the fixed term? What is the monthly rent, are there any arrears? Can you post the wording of the notice (removing any personal details)? You say its they are an RSL, is there a formal procedure set out re eviction, and also is there a formal complaints procedure to use? Has there been any other warning before now of the LL wanting to evict her?

Unfortunately these only apply to residential tenancies or leases, commercial leases are completely different (even if the lease includes a residential part) and everything that is written in the lease is what you are liable for. The one exception maybe an unfair term as deemed by the OFT, but that's a tricky route to go down.

I believe that you do have a solid claim for your deposit, especially as you have not cashed the cheque. There are two options available to you, one is that you simply claim for you deposit in the Small Claims Court, where the fees are low, the process fairly simple, and there is no risk of you having to pay the landlords solicitors costs should you lose (although from the info given it doesn't sound like you would). The second option is the one where you would claim for you deposit + the 3x compensation. This is not heard in a small claims court, it is know as a Part 8 Claim, which means you could be liable for the landlords costs should you lose, it is strongly recommended that you seek legal advice before pursuing this option,. The case of Tiensia v Universal Estates t/a Vision Enterprise, has been heard in the Appeals Court, but as far as I'm aware is being taken even higher. This means that any decision made on this case (and other similar cases e.g Honeysuckle and Draycott and Hannels) are binding on the lower courts. There was also a case heard in the High Court on the 7th Feb which will bring new light to the argument of protecting a deposit after a tenancy has ended which has yet to have judgement passed. As it stands currently, the cases listed above, amount to the opinion (and this is very subjective from solicitor to solicitor and judge to judge) that a landlord can escape the compensation part of the law if they protect the deposit at any time before the court hearing, even if the tenancy has ended. This would not necessarily mean they would 'win' as such, but that is up to the judge on the day, and you could be liable for the costs running into 4 figures.

If rent is payable monthly, then a minimum 2 months rent must be unpaid at the date of the hearing. This does not mean in arrears, it means simply unpaid as per the contract. Therefore, if you missed a payment that was due on say, 1st of Jan, then missed your 1st of Feb payment, 2 months is unpaid as of the 2nd of Feb. If you have proof to show that you do not have 2 months rent unpaid, you should submit this in your defence, the papers you were sent should detail how to go about this. If you are unsure, you can ask the court, or Shelter/CAB will be happy to assist. You say that the paperwork mentions a section 8 notice and a section 21, did you ever receive a section 21 notice (also known as a notice of intention to seek possession)? It seems as though your landlord is keen to get you out, if not for rent unpaid, then through the section 21 route, which requires no reason to evict. Therefore it may be wise to seek alternative accommodation, you will still have to give your landlord the proper one months notice to expire at the end of a rental period, and probably still have to attend court so as to avoid a CCJ. Just to confirm your current tenancy status, can you let me know: When did you tenancy begin? How long was the fixed term? Did you pay a deposit, and is this protected? Did you have any other warning of eviction before these papers arriving?

As you most likely have a commercial lease, you will have to refer to what it says to see who is responsible for making any changes or conforming with the fire regulations. If you are unsure, you can post your lease here (with any personal details removed) so that further advice can be offered.

Yes your deposit should be protected, as you have an AST. This is referred to under the Housing Act 2004, Section 214, and the sections surrounding it. In order to check this, you should be able to contact each of the three govt approved schemes (mydeposits, TDS, and the DPS) and verify which one of them it is secured with.

Its tenuous, but all may not be lost with your counter-claim. I remember reading before that part of the legislation says that you must be able to verify the protection of your deposit, and also have the prescribed information. If you required an ID with the DPS to confirm protection then you are still currently unable to do this, also I believe the prescribed info must contain this. I've also seen it recommended for those that start a claim on the basis of non-protection to follow through with the claim even if the deposit is protected before the hearing so as to be able to be awarded costs by the judge. The judge you have may not necessarily be able to award you the 3x, but certainly has the discretion over costs etc and seems to be very irritated by the LL already, this will work in your favour. I do wish you the best of luck with what has already been a very difficult LL.

The contract says that your son could not have exclusive occupation, but can only use 'a room'. Which says to me they're trying it on as a joint agreement, but it can't be joint if all tenants are not names on one tenancy agreement. Even if they are, can you say which 'number' in the list of names your sons appears? It seems that your guarantor agreement is unenforceable, which means it cannot be relied upon in court. You were not given a copy of the TA which means you had no 'contractual consideration' when signing. I know this may be irrelevant with the rent being paid up, but does prevent the landlord chasing you for any claim for damages. In order to instigate the return of the deposit you need to contact the scheme protecting the deposit, in the agreement it is listed as the DPS. Prescribed information including a protection certificate should have been provided to your son. If you are unable to find the deposit as registered with them, please return and I can inform you of further steps to take. It is best not to inform the landlord if you find this, as non-protection can carry a fine in court. Also, do keep an eye on whether the room is re-let. If this happens then you will be entitled to a pro-rata refund of the rent paid. The landlord cannot let the same premises several times over, and you would be able to claim the refund in court if the landlord is not forthcoming.

Sorry if I miss any details, as your post is long and I've scanned it. Just a few questions 1. Was the guarantor agreement executed as a deed, and was this witnessed? Were you specifically given a copy of the tenancy agreement (not your sons copy) at the same time or before signing the guarantor document? 2. Did all the tenants have an agreement that includes the whole house? Or did each tenant have a room detailed on the agreement? Do the rooms have locks on the doors, and did the landlord have access to the communal areas? In regards to the landlord not doing anything with the other tenants. I presume the incident involved violence as the police were involved and certainly sounds serious. I would recommend that your son gets some legal advice from Shelter, or alternatively CAB. As the failure to act on the part of the landlord may breach your sons right to 'quiet enjoyment' and therefore amount to harrassment. However, if the landlord did push ahead with action against these tenants, whether the agreements were individual or joint and several plays and important part. If joint, then the landlord is unable to simply 'evict' the troublemakers, he would have to evict everyone. Also, the process of eviction for anti-social/violent behaviour although faster than other routes, can still take up to a couple of months with hearings, bailiff appointments etc, if they refuse to 'go quietly'.

If the contract does not have a break clause allowing the tenants to leave early then they are responsible for the rent for the entire 12 months. This is providing that you conduct yourself as if the tenancy were continuing and do not re-let. In order to hold them to their contractual obligations you can take them to court for the sum owing. However, if you have made an agreement with them that they can leave they may argue an 'implied surrender' of the tenancy. In order to avoid this you should communicate in writing (with proof of postage obtained) that they are liable for the entire contract, and its payment. Also, do NOT enter the property or accept the return of the keys. Alternatively, you may wish to let them leave, but negotiate a payment amount for your re-letting costs and the rent while you do this (plus any inconvenience).

IMO he would only be able to charge you a portion of the re-letting costs as he only re-let a week early. So 26 weeks in 6 months, he could reasonably hold you to 1/26th of the cost, which I'm sure doesn't amount to very much!

When did the tenancy end?

The agent may well have been correct at the time of giving you the advice, however, since the 1st Oct 2010 the threshold for tenancies being an Assured Shorthold Tenancy (and therefore subject to deposit protection laws) was increased to rental values of up to 100k PA. Since that date the tenancy you granted would have become an AST, however, it is still not clear if deposit protection is necessary for those tenancies already in place. In order to protect yourself, you should try to protect an amount equal to the deposit now. I believe the DPS will allow you to do this despite the protection being 'late'. As it stands currently there are appeals court judgements (which are binding on lower courts) to say that protection any of the 3 deposit protection schemes no matter how late, but so long as before any court hearing, is a valid protection and no compensation shall be due to the tenant. It does seem that the tenant has breached the contract quite significantly, however I believe you will find it difficult to claim for removal and return of the furniture as you agreed it was ok at the beginning of the tenancy. I do hope that you also have a good inventory and check-out report so as to be able to substantiate the damage you claim they may have caused, without this you may not be able to claim from the deposit.

You talk as though using the ADR is a bad thing.... I believe it to be quite the opposite, the mediators seem to look favourably on tenants, and ask for a lot more 'proof' that perhaps a court would in most circumstances. The decision is NOT binding and you can still appeal to the courts afterwards should you wish. I have seen many cases over various law websites, forums etc where tenants have done well using the mediation, and as the cost to you is nothing, I don't see why its not a good option.

Did you by any chance serve a notice on the tenant before they moved in letting them know that the property was previously your home and that you may require it back at some point? This may make it quicker for you to regain possession should you have any difficulty. The section 21 procedure is probably the simplest, but can be difficult if the tenant does not leave when the notice expires.

IMO, the OP is correct with the last day of their fixed term being 13th Feb, as this is exactly 6 months. I do not believe there is any requirement for notice to be given so long as the property is surrendered immediately before the fixed term expires, it would be nonsensical of a contract to hold you longer than a 'term certain of...'

Depending on the scheme used, some require that a deposit is re-protected each time you have a new tenancy agreement, or when going onto a statutory periodic tenancy. This may mean that your deposit is not protected correctly. In addition a text message, does not count as written notice, and if the LL tries to say it does in court, he will not be able to prove that it was recieved, and this may prevent a possession order being granted. If you have no heating, then this can be a serious breach of your landlord's repairing obligations. Your landlord should be informed in writing of any repairs that need doing. If these are not completed within a reasonable time, you are able to go to the Tenancy Relations Officer at the local council. They will be able to inspect and can force the landlord to complete the repairs, they can also fine and/or do the repairs themselves and bill the landlord./

Can you please be more concise, and list the questions you have?

http://painsmith.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/universal-v-tiensia.pdf

A holiday let is different as it is not a tenancy per se, it is known as a 'license to occupy'. Therefore, there is little or no protection from eviction, and a LL could simply come in and change the locks with any 'reasonable notice'. Obviously, what is reasonable to a LL wanting their property back, and a T who feels the property is their home, can be VERY different!

The problem with claims for non-compliance is that they are not heard in the small claims track of the court system. They are what's called a part 8 claim, which means that should you lose you would be liable for your landlord's legal costs. These costs can easily run into the thousands. Recent appeals court rulings have also complicated the process by allowing landlords to protect the deposit right up until the hearing date so as to escape the 'fine' of 3x the deposit as compensation. I can't advise this as a course of action, but if you are up to date with your rent, and know you left the property in a good condition. You could consider not paying the last month's rent in lieu of the deposit.

It depends on the tenancy agreement at the time. For 'new' tenants no matter how short the tenancy agreement a section 21 cannot expire until they have been there 6 months. For current tenants, a section 21 cannot expire during a 'fixed term' i.e. the minimum period of any tenancy agreement signed. This may have been a tenancy renewal or a whole new agreement. If no tenancy agreement was signed since the original 6/12 month one, then you would have a statutory periodic tenancy which requires no less than 2 months notice to expire at the end of a rental period, for a section 21 notice.

Ultimately, s11 of L & T act 1985 is very clear that it is the landlords responsibility to rectify the issues with the heating system, and therefore pay for it. It is then also the landlords responsibility to pursue you for payment if they believe that you are at fault. This may well lead to a court case against you, some very bitter feelings, and possibly eviction in the future. It may well be best for you to negotiate wherever possible.