help with contract / landlord problems

[nmitchell]

Hi!

 

I have been renting in a 6 month contract from 25th May this year.

 

My rent has been paid for a few months (only by 2 days) due to the date I get paid.

 

Last month (october) my work dried up and I could only afford to pay 3/4 of my rent as I was waiting for a cq to arrive from housing benefit. I now have the cq and will be paying it into bank and paying the landlord the remainder of the rent.

 

They hassled me every day last week saying where is the money and getting nasty saying rent is always late etc.

 

I saw them a couple of weeks ago and we verbally agreed for me to stay on another 6 months, Nothing in writing.

 

Since then I have decided to leave, I left them a voicemail on 1st novemeber to say I would be leaving and it was my one months notice.

 

I will ofcourse follow this up in writing.

 

As I pay one months in advance am I right in saying the only money i owe is the weeks rent as I gave notice on 1st november not 25th october?

 

Or do i just say I am leaving 25th November and therefore not owe any monies at all?

 

Contract runs out on 25th November.

 

As I am moving in with BF I am also going to ask them if they wish me to leave my fridge and freezer behind (otherwise will go to house clearance) as it would surely be easier then them moving their old one back in (mine is newer).

 

I want to leave on as good terms as i can.

 

I will ofcourse make sure that the carpets are cleaned and any marks on walls are painted over before I go.

[Joa]

Your situation can develop into two scenarios:

(1) as you have made an agreement to extend your tenancy for further 6 months, you have a new, valid contract. The fact that it is verbal doesn't mean it's non-existent; it would be just quite difficult to prove, if someone wanted to. You cannot just give notice and expect to be accepted. You are bound by the rules of your original tenancy agreement, which was extended. You can only leave if the landlord agrees to it (vital to get in in writing) or/and if your original tenancy agreement contained a so called "early break" clause- essentially a parahraph which states that early termination is allowed and gives the conditions (how much notice, etc). If your landlord has a knowledge of landlord and tenants laws and regulations or if he seeks advice, he may not accept your notice and would be entirely within the law to reject it. Besides, your notice is not even a month long (contract expires on 25th, you've left a message on 1st, prescribed form for notices is in writing).

(2) Normally, tenants who do not wish to extend their contracts and intent to leave when the tenancy expires do not have to give notice. It is understood that they just leave upon expiry. This is your hope- that your conversation about extension would be ignored. Small hope, I know.

I would suggest that you have a chat with your landlord and follow it up with a letter, confirming your intention to leave. Maybe he would agree; tell him you are aware that you have a poor payment history and that you may be going through financial difficulties (no landlord likes that!), so by leaving you are really doing him a favour! Sweeten it up with a fridge freezer and you may get lucky.

[Ed999]

The purported agreement to extend the tenancy by a further 6 months is invalid if no money changed hands. A contract is only legally binding if there is "offer", "acceptance" and "consideration".

 

If you made an offer to take a further 6 month tenancy, and they accepted it, you have to pay money (called "consideration") to make the contract binding. Or, alternatively, sign an agreement by deed. The latter has clearly not happened, since it was only a verbal discussion.

 

Thus, you can move out on or before the last day of the fixed term. Provided you vacate the property and HAND BACK THE KEYS on or before that date, the tenancy ends, without any notice needing to be given, on the last day of the 6 months, i.e. 24th November.

 

See this thread: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/landlords-tenants/116385-shorthold-tenancy-posession-eviction.html

 

 

 

Advice & opinions on this forum are offered informally, without any assumption of liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified and insured professional if you have any doubts.

[nmitchell]

hi!

 

I already put a letter through their door today - confirming the message I left that I will be leaving and saying that as i gave notice as of 1st november I will pay the extra weeks rent of £150. Would rather i didnt have to pay that - but as i have said i will do.

 

I also left them a voicemail but no reply to either letter or call.

 

i also asked them if they wish for me to leave the fridge freezer behind as it would be easier for them rather then them bringing their old one back in.

 

Again no reply.

 

I will steam clean the carpets (and photograph) before i leave, clean the windows and nets, scrub oven and cuboards, and also repaint where there are scuff marks on walls from furniture being there.

 

Can anyone see any reason why I wont get my deposit back?

 

I explained in my letter that due to extreme financial difficulties i have decided it is best to move closer to my family where i have the support there.

 

thanks for any advice

[nmitchell]

i forgot to add i will be leaving the property BEFORE the 25th November when the 6 months is up

[MrShed]

Is the deposit in a tenancy deposit scheme?

[MrShed]

The purported agreement to extend the tenancy by a further 6 months is invalid if no money changed hands. A contract is only legally binding if there is "offer", "acceptance" and "consideration".

 

If you made an offer to take a further 6 month tenancy, and they accepted it, you have to pay money (called "consideration") to make the contract binding. Or, alternatively, sign an agreement by deed. The latter has clearly not happened, since it was only a verbal discussion.

 

Thus, you can move out on or before the last day of the fixed term. Provided you vacate the property and HAND BACK THE KEYS on or before that date, the tenancy ends, without any notice needing to be given, on the last day of the 6 months, i.e. 24th November.

 

See this thread: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/landlords-tenants/116385-shorthold-tenancy-posession-eviction.html

 

 

 

Advice & opinions on this forum are offered informally, without any assumption of liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified and insured professional if you have any doubts.

 

For once Ed I'm not going to automatically doubt you. And I understand the logic. However, would the rules of offer acceptance and consideration actually apply on an EXTENSION to the contract?

[nmitchell]

I am not sure if it is in a tenancy deposit scheme - i would presume so as the rental started in May 2007.

[MrShed]

Did they provide you with details of the TDS?

[nmitchell]

They havent no!

 

Also my son drew on his bedroom room, i intend to redecorate the room in similar if not same colour (or as near as damn it) do you think this will effect my deposit?

[GlasweJen]

It shouldn't if you make right for it (redecorating in the same colour should be enough).

[nmitchell]

i am going to paint as near as I can find it and steam clean the carpets etc.

 

The landlord hasnt informed me if my deposit is in a TDS

[MrShed]

That makes a BIG difference.

 

If the AST deposit has not been protected under either one of the types of scheme, what protection does a tenant have?

Until the deposit has been safeguarded by a scheme, the landlord/agent is unable to regain possession of the property using the usual “notice only” ground for possession (section 21). How will a tenant know or be able to find out if the deposit has been protected? At commencement of the AST the landlord/agent will have to provide the tenant with details of the scheme under which the deposit is to be protected (the custodial or an insurance-backed scheme). The tenant will be able to contact the scheme administrator to establish that their deposit under that specific tenancy has been registered.

What happens if a landlord/agent has not protected the deposit under one of the schemes?

The tenant can apply for a court order forcing the landlord to place the deposit under the protection of one of the schemes and or requiring the landlord to provide the tenant with the prescribed information about the location of the deposit e.g. the scheme details.

Where the court is satisfied that the landlord/agent has failed to comply with the requirements and the deposit is not being held in accordance with an authorised scheme the court must either:

• Make an order requiring, that within 14 days, the deposit amount is repaid to the tenant, or,
  
• Order the landlord to pay the deposit amount into the designated account held by the custodial scheme administrator.

The court must also order the landlord/agent to pay, within 14 days, to the tenant (or person who paid the deposit on her/his behalf) an amount equivalent to three times the deposit amount.

What if I move put of the property before realising my deposit hasn’t been protected under one of the schemes?

You will need to apply for a court order and the court will make an order requiring the landlord to repay the deposit to you. It is in your interests to check at commencement of the tenancy that your deposit has been protected so that you avoid this situation.

[Ed999]

Can anyone see any reason why I wont get my deposit back?

 

Read this thread: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/landlords-tenants/117572-unfair-deposit-deductions.html

[Ed999]

i forgot to add i will be leaving the property BEFORE the 25th November when the 6 months is up

 

May I mention, again, that the last day of the tenancy is 24th November. You must move out on or before the 24th, not the 25th.

 

 

 

Advice & opinions on this forum are offered informally, without any assumption of liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified and insured professional if you have any doubts.

[Ed999]

For once Ed I'm not going to automatically doubt you. And I understand the logic. However, would the rules of offer acceptance and consideration actually apply on an EXTENSION to the contract?

 

The common law rules of offer, acceptance and consideration apply just as much to a variation of a contract as to the formation of a contract.

 

In a legal sense, there is not really such a thing as a variation. Rather, there is a new contract, with different terms, which replaces the original contract.

 

 

 

Advice & opinions on this forum are offered informally, without any assumption of liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified and insured professional if you have any doubts.

[Ed999]

Did they provide you with details of the TDS?

 

The tenant has the right to sue the landlord for failure to comply with the TDS rules. The court must order the landlord to return the deposit and, in addition, to pay to the tenant a mandatory penalty of THREE TIMES the amount of the deposit.

 

Read this thread: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/tenants/117280-tenancy-deposit-scheme.html

 

 

 

Advice & opinions on this forum are offered informally, without any assumption of liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified and insured professional if you have any doubts.

[MrShed]

Fair enough

 

I am going off topic here somewhat. But just for curiosities sake, I am confused between the law as you state it(which I know is the case) and what actually happens.

 

For example. A tenant pays a holding deposit for a property. Signs a contract. Never moves in and doesnt pay rent. How come, as is clearly the case(it has happened enough, and has been backed up in court), the agent is allowed to deduct/sue for the financial loss due to the tenancy falling through(ie reletting costs etc), even though the consideration part of the contract never took place? Or has my contract law understanding gone skew whiff?

[Ed999]

If the tenant pays the deposit and signs the contract, all the requirements of offer, acceptance and consideration are met. The contract is therefore formed.

 

The tenant, in breach of contract, then fails to pay the rent. The landlord sues on the breach of contract. The court awards damages, including the cost of re-letting the premises.

 

The landlord is opting to re-let rather than sue for the loss of rent over the 6 month term of the contract.

 

 

 

Advice & opinions on this forum are offered informally, without any assumption of liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified and insured professional if you have any doubts.

[MrShed]

So by your reasoning Ed, you reckon that if the tenancy was signed and agreed to move in etc but didnt, but no deposit was paid, no damages could be claimed? Am I understanding correctly?

[Ed999]

It is trite law that a contract is binding only where there is an offer, an acceptance of the terms of that offer, consideration moves from the tenant, and there is an intention to create legal relations.

 

Where there is consideration, even merely nominal consideration (since the court will not enquire into the adequacy of the consideration), the tenant is bound.

 

The question of whether the tenant has given consideration is a question of fact, to be decided by the court on the facts of each case. Payment of the deposit would certainly satisfy the requirement.

 

There is no requirement for consideration where the contract is contained in a deed, i.e. a written instrument executed under seal.

 

 

 

Advice & opinions on this forum are offered informally, without any assumption of liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified and insured professional if you have any doubts.