UK Landlord Forum / Life

My tenant was required to leave last Saturday after my letting agent sent him a Section 21 by email( agreed by him for communication)
but believes the Section 21 is not valid on 2 counts
My letting agent sent him the Section 21 at 1.01pm then the prescribed information at 1.02pm and tenant has said that the prescribed information should have been sent first and even though it was only wrong by a minute but but nonetheless wrong and also that these should not have been sent on the same day
My letting agent also attached How to rent guide version May 2019 and said he should have been sent the latest edition which is March 2023
My previous letting agent who I parted with a few months ago said I did not have to send any updated How to rent guide to existing tenants and this tenant still is under the previous agreement I had with them which I passed on to new letting agent
However my tenant is saying that a new letting agent is a substantial change requiring a new edition and also my new letting agent has used DPS to protect tenants deposits but have filled in DPS form( which my tenant has a screenshot of) stating that the old tenancy agreement has been cancelled and a new one started last year on the date my tenants rent was increased and not a new tenancy started.
I do not want to pay and lose £355 and pay letting agents fees to attend Court etc if this Section 21 will be judged to be invalid by Court or risk having to pay my tenant his deposit back and a possible claim for compensation.Any advice would be appreciated

Your agent should have sent the Prescribed Information when the deposit was protected.
Was this done? If so, there was no need to send it again with the Section 21, so the 1:01pm / 1:02pm issue is irrelevant.

Likewise, the How to Rent guide. You are obliged to send the tenant the latest version of guide when the tenancy begins. You don't need to update it when you send a Section 21.

QuoteMy previous letting agent who I parted with a few months ago said I did not have to send any updated How to rent guide to existing tenants and this tenant still is under the previous agreement I had with them which I passed on to new letting agent

That is correct if a new tenancy wasn't entered into.


Have a careful read of the PDF Section 21 flowchart here https://nearlylegal.co.uk/section-21-flowchart/

Thanks for you reply
The letting agent did not give him the prescribed information when they protected the deposit so I assume thats why they sent it with the Section 21
That tenant and others also complained that one of the Housing Managers from this letting agency banged loudly on all of their doors and without giving them any chance to read the prescribed documents said they would not be able to stay in the property if they did not sign them.
Most importantly they were made to sign the document from DPS (attached ) although it was blank and the only one I have seen is from the tenant who they have given notice to quit and then this was sent with it completed with Section 21 notice but without the Landlords section completed details and also that it was backdated which my tenant confirmed because he wouldn't open the door and made them make an appointment by email which he has proof of.It was also dated and his name was printed by someone at their office
Therefore DPS have told that the form is incomplete and that tenants should have had a chance to review it if it had been filled in and they should have provided a copy of the DPS terms and conditions with the form.None of my tenants have received any of the prescribed forms since this happened over 2 months ago apart from the one tenant they sent the Section 21.I am now more concerned amount the damage and cost this agent may cause me if all 11 can claim their deposits back with compensation and wish now I had never changed agents.I have just made an appointment to see my Solicitor next week to see where I stand but he did say on the phone that I am ultimately responsible.

Quote from: longmat on July 20, 2023, 10:43:25 AM
The letting agent did not give him the prescribed information when they protected the deposit so I assume thats why they sent it with the Section 21

Then they have failed in their obligations as your agent. If it were me in your position, I would be writing to them when to ask why they didn't do it. Then, when this is all resolved, I would be seeking return of part of the fees I'd paid them to do their job correctly.

<=== See my signature.

Quote
That tenant and others also complained that one of the Housing Managers from this letting agency banged loudly on all of their doors and without giving them any chance to read the prescribed documents said they would not be able to stay in the property if they did not sign them.

Your tenant had every right to complain. What the housing manager said was wrong.  Once again, I'd ask in writing why this was done.

Build your case against the agent, step by step.

Quote
Most importantly they were made to sign the document from DPS (attached ) although it was blank and the only one I have seen is from the tenant who they have given notice to quit and then this was sent with it completed with Section 21 notice but without the Landlords section completed details and also that it was backdated which my tenant confirmed because he wouldn't open the door and made them make an appointment by email which he has proof of. It was also dated and his name was printed by someone at their office

Again, write to ask why this was done.

Don't mention a claim for compensation at this point. That comes later once you have all the evidence.

Quote
Therefore DPS have told that the form is incomplete and that tenants should have had a chance to review it if it had been filled in and they should have provided a copy of the DPS terms and conditions with the form.None of my tenants have received any of the prescribed forms since this happened over 2  months ago apart from the one tenant they sent the Section 21. I am now more concerned amount the damage and cost this agent may cause me if all 11 can claim their deposits back with compensation and wish now I had never changed agents. I have just made an appointment to see my Solicitor next week to see where I stand but he did say on the phone that I am ultimately responsible.

Ultimately responsible, yes.

But you are entitled to pursue the agent for your losses once they are established.

Get a copy of your agents formal complaints procedure.

Thanks again Handyman and really appreciate all your assistance and advice
I only discovered this website today and great to know there are people
giving their time to help other folks with problems

I have only just seen "Agent Slayer" which had me smiling for the first time today!
I assume you too must have had problems with agents in the past
Looking forward to reading your other posts

Will keep the forum updated as to how I get on if anyone is interested

All the best

Quote from: longmat on July 20, 2023, 03:40:40 PM
I have only just seen "Agent Slayer" which had me smiling for the first time today!
I assume you too must have had problems with agents in the past

I'm glad to have made you smile.

Yes, I did have problems. I eventually terminated the contract with the agent and got several month's fees returned by way of compensation for their errors.

Quote
Looking forward to reading your other posts

There are many people on here who are much more knowledgeable than me. I learnt a great deal from following the forum and reading their advice.

There's some occasional gentle banter too, which is a bonus.

Quote
Will keep the forum updated as to how I get on if anyone is interested

Please do. We all learn from each other's experiences.

Quote from: longmat on July 20, 2023, 08:16:03 AMMy letting agent sent him the Section 21 at 1.01pm then the prescribed information at 1.02pm and tenant has said that the prescribed information should have been sent first and even though it was only wrong by a minute but but nonetheless wrong and also that these should not have been sent on the same day

The tenant is correct about the sequencing, but wrong about the need for it to be different days. Sending notices by email creates issues about timing, emails have ne deemed delivery rules and may not be received in the order sent, or at all. In my opinion, agents (and landlords who serve notices by email are usually lazy and likely to get other things wrong). Emails are brilliant ways of communicating things, but legal notices are critical things that require thought and checking, neither of which are features of email.

QuoteMy letting agent also attached How to rent guide version May 2019 and said he should have been sent the latest edition which is March 2023

. The version required is the one contemporary with the start of the tenancy, and the start of the subsequent periodic tenancy if the guide had changed in the interim.

QuoteHowever my tenant is saying that a new letting agent is a substantial change requiring a new edition and also my new letting agent has used DPS to protect tenants deposits but have filled in DPS form( which my tenant has a screenshot of) stating that the old tenancy agreement has been cancelled and a new one started last year on the date my tenants rent was increased and not a new tenancy started.

unless a new tenancy agreement was signed, the tenant is wrong. If the agent actually said that, they're also wrong.

QuoteI do not want to pay and lose £355 and pay letting agents fees to attend Court etc if this Section 21 will be judged to be invalid by Court or risk having to pay my tenant his deposit back and a possible claim for compensation.Any advice would be appreciated

Your notice is invalid.

If your original agent didn't serve the Prescribed Information within 30 days of receiving the deposit, a penalty is possible, because you acted unlawfully.

Thanks also for your help JPKEATES and as HANDYMAN said there are some very knowledgeable people on here
Certainly saved me £355 and I may even cancel seeing my Solicitor.Sometimes they convince you have a bombproof case
and then when you lose say " not sure what happened there but anyway here's your bill!!"
Agree that the Section 21 is probably invalid.Agent charged me £75 just for sending by email!

Quote from: longmat on July 21, 2023, 12:28:46 PM
Agent charged me £75 just for sending by email!

Add that to the amount of compensation you will be seeking.

As advised above, don't ask for compensation yet; get answers to your questions in writing, then build your case.

Thanks Handyman

I will indeed build my case and think I am more annoyed with my Letting Agent and it was on their advice
that I agreed for them to serve Section 21 on my tenant especially rubbing their hands thinking of all
the extra fees they can charge finding a new tenant etc

I did email my Tenant this morning and he agreed to some of the advice you have given although I obviously
didn't say where it came from as I don't want him or my letting agent having any heads up if they recognize
me by my questions on this forum

My tenant did however mention 2 other problems surrounding my Section 21 the first I will mention here
and the 2nd in a further post
He stated that on the Section 21 the letting agent put his private name on it ie Mr John Smith
( apologies to any John Smiths on here) but on all contracts and DPS forms he puts John Smith Letting Agents
which is the trading name of John Smith Letting Agents Ltd and he thinks this also invalidates the Section 21
as it is essential to use the right names on a legal document.Thoughts!! Cheers

You haven't said why you wish this tenant to be gone. What have they done?

I'm a little puzzled you wrote:

Quote from: longmat on July 21, 2023, 04:02:19 PM
I [...] think I am more annoyed with my Letting Agent and it was on their advice
that I agreed for them to serve Section 21 on my tenant especially rubbing their hands thinking of all
the extra fees they can charge finding a new tenant etc

Are you implying that had the agent not suggested it, you would not have served a Section 21 and would have kept the tenant on?

Or am I misunderstanding this?

Surely, whether it is you or they that serves the Section 21, they would still need to find a new tenant for you (and charge you fees). Or were you planning to ditch the agent as well.

I'm just a bit confused now.

When I changed letting agents the flat below the Section 21 tenant became empty after a long term tenant left and needed a full refurb including ripping out bathroom kitchen etc which they did with  their own workmen they use and price seemed reasonable.
However their workman also worked at the weekend and started at 7am  Sat/Sun and played loud music which "said tenant "accepted but then they put a new tenant in the flat who played very loud music all hours and Section 21 Tenant complained quoting from his Agreement re nuisance and noise and the right to a quiet life and said the new tenant had breached his contract and should have a warning of being given a Section 8  notice.The agent just ignored him and he is still suffering from this loud music now and has said he would probably be moving anyway because they don't seem to care
I did not know any of this as the agent hadn't told me other than this tenant was clearly a troublemaker and recommended the Section 21.
I do now feel some guilt but trusted this new agency to build up a good relationship with my tenants and that I could just get on with my other projects

Just seen this on a Solicitors online site

Inaccurate notices

A notice needs to ensure that it includes:

The tenant's full name (as it appears in the AST)
Full property address
Reason for eviction or grounds for possession (particularly for section
Date the notice ends
The landlord's name (as it appears in the AST)
Signature along with the name and address of the signatory.
A common mistake found in notices is a failure to include the landlord's name and address as it appears in the AST, or a failure to include the landlord's name and address in the AST in the first place. Section 48 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 requires landlords to provide an address, which must be in England or Wales, at which notices may be served on them by their tenants.

A notice must provide details of the landlord's name and address as it is stated in the tenancy agreement, and be signed by the landlord or agent. The signatory must then provide his/her details as requested underneath the signature. Failing to ensure this is done correctly may render the notice invalid. A common mistake is made by letting agents who put their details on the notice, rather than the landlords because they are signing it – this is incorrect, the landlord's name and address needs to be stated on the notice, and if the agent is signing the notice on behalf of the landlord, then they would need to put their name and address under their signature.

Quote from: longmat on July 21, 2023, 06:01:02 PMthen they put a new tenant in the flat who played very loud music all hours ...and Section 21 Tenant complained quoting from his Agreement re nuisance and noise and the right to a quiet life and said the new tenant had breached his contract and should have a warning of being given a Section 8  notice.The agent just ignored him and he is still suffering from this loud music now and has said he would probably be moving anyway because they don't seem to care

Why on earth are you evicting this tenant?

Based on what you have said, the problem seems to be with the tenant in the flat below. Surely they will disturb the peace of anyone the agent gets in to replace your Section 21 tenant.

Normally you, as landlord, shouldn't get involved in neighbour disputes (because that's what this is)... but in this case you need to take charge of your agent and direct them to deal with the real problem.

Establish the facts, and then assuming it it is as presented above, evict the tenant in the flat below if they won't reduce their music volume.

Isn't it better to keep the good tenant in the flat above? What has he done, apart from complain that the person below is noisy?

There's either more to this story that we don't know about... or you are evicting the wrong person.

Evict the noisy tenant.