Question regarding our rights re rent rise and contracts

[summer30]

We have been living in an agency let property since April 2007

 

When we moved in we asked for a years let, they made a mistake and put us on 6 months.

At the end of the 6 months they sent a new contract and said they do not put tenants on rolling contracts which is odd I t hought.

 

They asked for £47 contract fee which they took off when we said we would not pay it as we originally asked for a years contract.

 

Now we are coming to April, and weve had a new contract again for another 6 months, a charge of £47 for the new contract and now i rent has risen by £40 a month.

 

We havent yet signed this contract.

 

Also as we keep renewing the contract shouldnt our deposit now be under the new scheme? as it wasnt when we first signed with them in April.

 

The constant new contracts for 6 months is making it difficult for us to move and find another place, as normally we would go onto a rolling after 6 months and then give notice when we found a house. We are basically stuck here for 6 months each time. Can we make them put us on a rolling?

 

Any help appreciated.

[ShortlyTdwarf]

I am assuming that you have an Assured Shorthold Tenancy? Unfortunately, no, you cannot force them to put you on a periodic tenancy. It is the landlord's right to be allowed to renew the tenancy after the end of a set term.

 

An increase in the rent can be proposed by the landlord once every twelve months by serving a notice of their intention to do so under section 13 of the Housing Act 1988. Not sure whether this applies outside a periodic tenancy as I have never renewed a tenant's AST, just let them roll onto a periodic. You can, however, refer the increase to a fair rent board for assessment.

 

They should have put your deposit into a Tenancy Deposit Scheme at the start of the last tenancy renewal in October. And they should then have provided you within 14 days the following:

 

The contact details of the tenancy deposit scheme selected.

The landlord's contact details.

How to apply for the release of the deposit.

Information explaining the purpose of the deposit. What to do if there is a dispute about the deposit.

 

Where the landlord does not inform the tenant of the whereabouts of the deposit, the tenant can apply to the local courts. The courts can then order the landlord to either repay the deposit or get it protected. If the courts wishes are not carried out within 14 days the landlord will be ordered to repay three times the amount of the deposit to the tenant within 10 days. Futhermore where the deposit has not been protected the landlord can not evict the tenant using a Section 21.

 

As you have not yet signed the contract you still have the option of moving out at the end of the current one if you can find somewhere to move to. Though this may not be easy. I would not recommend this course of action. You have the option of either signing or not signing the new agreement. Bear in mind the info given regarding the deposit scheme, and that if you don't get the notice within 14 days of the signing of the contracts then apply to the courts to get it repayed or protected.

 

I hate it when landlords don't keep up to speed on current legislation regarding their tenancies, and especially so when it is an agency. You are under no obligation to tell them about the deposit scheme as it is in your favour if they don't do it and you take them to court.

[ShortlyTdwarf]

Incidentally, what date in april did you take out your first tenancy? As the start date for the TDS was 6th April 2007. If your deposit was paid after this date they should have used a deposit scheme then.

[Steve__M]

This is my understanding of what you *could* do:

 

Even though the contract is for 6 months, they still have to issue you with a notice to terminate the contract of at least two months.

 

Sometimes this is issued at the same time as the contract is renewed. If they have not yet issued such notice, then you have a right to stay beyond the contract period at which point the tenancy becomes periodic. At any time up to the end of the 6 months, they can issue notice of exactly 2 calendar months (ie. it doesn't have to be linked to a rent period till after the 6 months are up).

 

If your deposit is not protected, however, they cannot enforce the notice.

 

If you want to stay there you could be bolshie - ignore their letters, stay in the property after the contract has expired (at which point it becomes periodic), and continue to pay rent at the old value (until they issue a rent increase notice which they are allowed to do under a periodic tenancy).

 

You could also take action against them for not protecting your deposit (assuming they haven't - can you ask them to clarify). You'll potentially win 3 times your deposit (I still haven't seen any reports of a case on this being heard).

 

Obviously, you should also start planning to move because they probably will want you out eventually.

 

Alternatively, if you like where you live and you can put up with the rent rise, you could decide it is not worth the hassle and live with the 6 month contracts. However, you should still make sure they are protecting your deposit.

[ShortlyTdwarf]

This is my understanding of what you *could* do:

 

Even though the contract is for 6 months, they still have to issue you with a notice to terminate the contract of at least two months.

 

Sometimes this is issued at the same time as the contract is renewed. If they have not yet issued such notice, then you have a right to stay beyond the contract period at which point the tenancy becomes periodic. At any time up to the end of the 6 months, they can issue notice of exactly 2 calendar months (ie. it doesn't have to be linked to a rent period till after the 6 months are up).

I agree with all of the above, but the argument you are making falls down a bit in this next part.

If your deposit is not protected, however, they cannot enforce the notice. Until such time as the deposit has been entered into a TDS or the wishes of the court have been acceded to.

 

If you want to stay there you could be bolshie - ignore their letters, stay in the property after the contract has expired (at which point it becomes periodic), and continue to pay rent at the old value (until they issue a rent increase notice which they are allowed to do under a periodic tenancy).

This is the part where it gets difficult. If you ignore their new agreement then they will issue a section 21 notice for you to leave after the notice period. If you challenge this on the grounds of him not using a TDS then the minute he does this in accordance with the court's wishes or prior to going to court then he can then issue a section 21 notice and you haven't got a leg to stand on.

 

You could also take action against them for not protecting your deposit (assuming they haven't - can you ask them to clarify). You'll potentially win 3 times your deposit (I still haven't seen any reports of a case on this being heard). I have only ever heard of one case where this has happened. The usual outcome is that the court orders the landlord to either place the deposit into a TDS or refund the deposit. The LL gets a choice at this point and once the deposit has been dealt with correctly the LL regains all his rights. In the one case I know of where the tenant actually got his deposit back plus x3 the LL had been out of the country for 2 months and knew nothing of the court case. As usual, ignorance is no defence, and he was forced to pay up.

 

Obviously, you should also start planning to move because they probably will want you out eventually.

 

Alternatively, if you like where you live and you can put up with the rent rise, you could decide it is not worth the hassle and live with the 6 month contracts. However, you should still make sure they are protecting your deposit.

 

This last bit would be my recommandation in a case like this. At least it would mean that you now had 6 months to find somewhere more suitable and with probably an AST leading onto a periodic tenancy, which is better for both parties concerned.

[summer30]

thanks for the replies,

 

My husband called them and they have'nt rung him back yet but the lady said because we took our very first tenancy with them on April the 2nd 2007 we are not covered by the scheme even thought we signed a new contract in October, which is obviously wrong ?

 

We cant afford to move and will have to put up with the rent but we are going to move by october.

[ShortlyTdwarf]

It's always been my understanding that a new tenancy means that the deposit is rolled over and is not held as a continuance. But I'll check this for definite and get back to you.

[Steve__M]

The law is clear that a new AST means that the deposit has to be protected.

 

With regard to enforcing notice to quit, I did wonder as I wrote my message whether a notice issued at a time when the deposit was not protected was valid. So I checked The Housing Act 2004 which says:

 

"If section 213(6) is not complied with in relation to a deposit given in connection with a shorthold tenancy, no section 21 notice may be given in relation to the tenancy until such time as section 213(6)(a) is complied with."

 

So a section 21 issued when the deposit is unlawfully not protected is invalid. The landlord would have to protect the deposit, inform you where it is protected and only then can a valid section 21 be issued.

[Esio Trot]

If your deposit is not protected, however, they cannot enforce the notice.

 

It's more than this.

 

When they protect the deposit, they cannot then look to enforcing a s21 issued prior. If you read the legislation carefully any notice issued while the deposit does not comply with the rules is invalid.

 

They will have to issue a new one.

 

And I've just added this sentence in my edit to say you beat me to it!!!

[ShortlyTdwarf]

My husband called them and they have'nt rung him back yet but the lady said because we took our very first tenancy with them on April the 2nd 2007 we are not covered by the scheme even thought we signed a new contract in October, which is obviously wrong ?

 

As Steve said, they HAVE TO protect your deposit if you have renewed the tenancy. To quote the Deposit Protection Service's own website:

"This is a new AST and so TDP will apply. The deposit previously paid under the earlier tenancy is repayable to the tenant at the end of that tenancy, so it should be returned to the tenant. Alternatively, if the landlord wishes to continue to hold it as security in respect of the new tenancy it must be protected."