Enforcing "Notice to quit"

[Mike4]

Not my notice to quit, the tenant's notice to quit.

Last time they gave me notice to quit (a couple of years ago), on the day of vacation they changed their minds, paid another month's rent and failed to move out. Monumentally messed me about as I had builders ready to pull the place to pieces and carry out a much-needed renovation. Other than paying the rent clock-work reliably whilst being less than the ideal tenant in so many other ways, I let it go. I took the money and allowed the periodic tenancy to continue.

Now, with the Renters (Reform) Bill and an even more anti-landlord government on the horizon, they've given me Notice to Quit again. Therefore this time I'd be delighted to get shot of them and this looks like it might be the perfect opportunity.

But what happens if their Notice to Quit expires and they again fail to move out? Can I go directly to applying for a Possession Order on the basis of their Notice to Terminate? Or is it back to square one and I have to issue my own Notice to Quit?

Any advice welcome as I've never seen this scenario ever discussed.

Thanks.

[Lootman]

I have not been through exactly such a situation but I did have a case where my tenant "cancelled" their notice to quit. As it happened I was happy to let them stay on but I did ask my solicitor about the status of such a retraction, and I was told that it is allowed as long as they catch up on any rent due.

That is part of the reason why I would never start my search for a new tenant until the former tenant had actually physically vacated.

[servodude]

But what happens if their Notice to Quit expires and they again fail to move out? Can I go directly to applying for a Possession Order on the basis of their Notice to Terminate? Or is it back to square one and I have to issue my own Notice to Quit?

Can you formally accepted their notice, in a way that forms a mutual notice to quit from your end?

At least that way the ball is rolling (or has gathered a bit of momentum depending on the point at which one might have considered the rolling to have started)

[GoSeigen]

Several online discussions on this topic suggest that you can recover double rent for the overstay period under the Distress of rent act 1737. However I didn't spot any law web sites covering this point so I'd definitely get legal advice, especially as applicability of any law may depend on the precise nature of the tenancy.

GS

[pochisoldi]

Promissory estoppel?
"The doctrine that a promise made without the exchange of consideration is binding and enforceable if: The defendant made a clear and unambiguous promise. The plaintiff acted in reliance on the defendant's promise."

ISTR reading that this is a "shield not a sword", in that it is a way to recover actual costs incurred, rather than enforce the promise.

Also I would say that any avoidable costs incurred after the withdrawal would be unclaimable, and don't expect a general/unquantified claim for "being messed around" to succeed either

One solution to keep the faff down is to acknowledge the notice with an acceptance letter that states that that the notice can be withdrawn at any point, but the only way to withdraw without consequence is to do it at least 2 weeks before the end date, and after that date the tenant will be responsible for any additional costs incurred by the landlord by relying on their notice.

Then ensure that you don't do anything avoidable that can't be cancelled until the "point of no return" has been reached.

[bungeejumper]

Depends on the wording of the lease, surely? There are ways of reining in a tenant's (ahem) options in this sort of situation, and some solicitors use them pre-emptively. They won't always hold water if the law has changed in the meantime, but it might be worth looking into.

Appreciate that you don't want to antagonise your tenant, who has paid the rent reliably and presumably not trashed the place. Speaking of which, the last I heard, a landlord's need to get the builders in for a general overhaul was a strong argument. As for how strong, I know naaaaaathin' .

BJ

[Mike4]

Thanks for replies everyone.

Just to clarify, I am not seeking compensation for expenses incurred should our tenant fail to vacate as per their notice, but rather to enforce their moving out. But given Looty's helpful memory of discussions with his solicitor on the subject it looks as though the law would take the view that the periodic tenancy just continues.

Given the tight state of the private rental market in the area, if their apparent new place falls through they will be hard-pressed to find anywhere else to live and move out, whatever bits of paper might change hands between us.

[monabri]

We have a tenant that emailed us to say he was leaving. He'd been in the property for over two years and the tenancy agreement was now "rolling". He then decided to change his mind. This was late last year.

At the time we actually took solicitors advice because his payments were spasmodic and he owed about £1800 - we wanted him "out".The solicitor looked at the tenancy agreement and deemed that

(1) until he actually wrote to us in the form of a letter, he had NOT officially served a valid notice to quit - emails were NOT accepted based on the AST wording.

(2) the terms were three months notice period.

As he had not validly served a notice to quit, we could not refuse him carrying on. The problem was that if we were to let out the property to a.n.other he could turn round and legally take us to court for renting out the property.

The solicitor suggested that we use the "Forfeiture" clause in the AST whereby if he didn'pay any money 14 days after the rent was due, we could peacefully enter the premises, change the locks and then use a Torts notice to tell him how he could collect his stuff. We were to have NO comms regarding missed rent payments during this time.

Christmas came and went, he paid some more money in drips and drabs.

At the start of the New Year, he once again sent an email saying he wanted to quit - one month notice. We told him to

(1) write to us formally and post the letter (in a letterbox of our house, about 20 feet away - mark it "by hand")
(2) We would allow him to backdate the letter such that he would be legally free to leave after 1 month.
(3) As a gesture of Goodwill we allowed him to reduce the notice period from 3 to 1 month.
(4) We explained WHY we demanded a simple letter based on legal advice from our solictor.
(5) If he did not accept this offer, then we would have to insist on adherance to the contract and he would not have served his notice legally. He would remain responsible for the rent/bills etc until he did so and that we were not able to market the property until he did so. The notice period would revert to the contractual 3 months .

It is looking like he is burying his head in the sand and ignoring the offer. It is also looking like he is not going to pay any more rent.

We have asked an estate agent to find another tenant, if no rent is forthcoming from our current tenant, we will use forfeiture to allow us to take on the new tenant at some future time. At which point we will file a claim in the small claims court for rent loss, delapidations on the property (damage).

Sometimes, tenants need to be reminded of THEIR responsibilities when the sign a contract.

[GoSeigen]

Sometimes, tenants need to be reminded of THEIR responsibilities when the sign a contract.

Sometimes Landlords need to be reminded of the law!

The post is a bit odd, especially the alleged advice of the solicitor, I expect some of the detail has not made it into the post, or maybe there is some misconstruction of the solicitor's advice.

Forfeiture is all well and good but you CANNOT enter the property and change the locks if the tenant has not actually vacated the property (and even if he has, you should be VERY careful). The only way a tenant can be evicted absent his agreement is by an order of the court. And if a landlord wishes to obtain such a court order it would be best to ensure that everything has been done by the book.

If I were such a landlord I'd also think very seriously about getting a second legal opinion from someone who is a property specialist.

I suspect the reason tenant is ignoring the "offer" is because it is not an offer at all. You cannot offer someone something which is less than what is required by the law. Bottom line is the tenant is lawfully entitled to remain in his home until a court orders him to leave, rent overdue or not, and I suspect he knows that very well.


GS

[SteelCamel]

Not my notice to quit, the tenant's notice to quit.

Last time they gave me notice to quit (a couple of years ago), on the day of vacation they changed their minds, paid another month's rent and failed to move out. Monumentally messed me about as I had builders ready to pull the place to pieces and carry out a much-needed renovation. Other than paying the rent clock-work reliably whilst being less than the ideal tenant in so many other ways, I let it go. I took the money and allowed the periodic tenancy to continue.

Now, with the Renters (Reform) Bill and an even more anti-landlord government on the horizon, they've given me Notice to Quit again. Therefore this time I'd be delighted to get shot of them and this looks like it might be the perfect opportunity.

But what happens if their Notice to Quit expires and they again fail to move out? Can I go directly to applying for a Possession Order on the basis of their Notice to Terminate? Or is it back to square one and I have to issue my own Notice to Quit?

I don't think there's anything stopping you issuing your own notice now if you want. Assuming this is in England, it doesn't look like section 21 has been repealed yet, so you can just give them two month's notice. If they move out under their own notice, your notice will simply have no effect (as it terminates a tenancy that no longer exists). If they don't, your own notice is still running and they have to leave when it expires. And they can't really complain about you giving them notice to leave, since they've already said they want to go - if they object it's admitting that they didn't mean what they said.

[Clitheroekid]

The solicitor suggested that we use the "Forfeiture" clause in the AST whereby if he didn'pay any money 14 days after the rent was due, we could peacefully enter the premises, change the locks and then use a Torts notice to tell him how he could collect his stuff.

Well the first thing you need to do is sack your solicitor! That is shockingly bad advice - are you sure he/she is actually a qualified solicitor, and that you weren't perhaps advised by the office cleaner, who was taking a break in the solicitor's office?

If you were to follow that advice you would be committing a serious criminal offence under the Protection of Eviction Act 1977. You would also be liable to pay civil damages for illegal eviction, normally several thousand pounds plus the same or quite possibly even more in legal costs.

We have asked an estate agent to find another tenant, if no rent is forthcoming from our current tenant, we will use forfeiture to allow us to take on the new tenant at some future time.

No you won't!

I hope the solicitor didn't charge you for this advice - if they did you should demand a full refund, and you should also make a formal complaint to the firm, as he/she is a menace. Other clients have probably received the same advice but don't have CK to keep them out of jail!

[tacpot12]

You would be back to square one, and have to issue your own S21 notice. So I would recommend that you do that now. There is no need for this to come over nasty, just tell your tenant that really want to get on with the building work and will go to court if they are not gone when your notice expires.

I'm not a solicitor, but have been a landlord for nearly 15 years.