UK Landlord Forum / Life

Hi,

I have a problem with a famous letting agency in London. I renewed my tenancy agreement for 1 year in April 14 but I had told the Landlord I did not want to commit for 6 months or 1 year and that I would need to be able to leave provided that I give a 2 month notice. She agreed but the agency did not listen.

They left that clause of 6 month lock-in in the contract and I signed it as I misunderstood the last sentence of the following section:

FIXED TERM "One year from and including 1st April 2014 to and including March 31st 2015. Either party shall have the right to terminate this agreement by giving the other party not less than two months'' advance written notice. By email at X..x. This notice can only expire after the first six months of the renewed term.

The thing is I used to live with my girlfriend but she left in January so she was not supposed to be on the new lease

However her name still was on the contract but I was the only one who signed it.

Can I prove that the document is not valid?

Or can I prove that it is unfair to put in a lock in clause of 6 months in the second contract as there was already one in the iniatial tenancy agreement?

I tried not to renew and to go on with a rolling contract after my 1st agreement expired but the agency and the Landlord refused and said they wanted to be covered by a contract.

Otherwise they say I have to pay the rent until October and I am leaving the country this summer. Even if they find a new tenant I would have to pay the landlord commission (about 12% of the rent)

Is there anything I can do?

Thanks a lot in advance

I think which ever way, you will have a fight on your hands.

My advice, pick up the phone and speak to the Landlord, explain your position, and ask if it would be possible to leave early, and see what he / she says.

If that fails then when the time comes, if you can, get you and your ex to send a termination of your original AST letter as if you were on rolling. Make sure you hand the keys back.

It is wrong they do this, especially given they insist you have a brand new tenancy, but then do not take into account the fact that your personal circumstances have changed completely. I suspect they did this, rather than charge you again as a brand new "tenant" as that is what they like to do I assume... Nice of them!

They outcome could go one of many different ways, but I think at least trying the above will mean that you get what you want, but you may have to pay what you would have had to pay, but in the longer term. If you are going travelling etc, just make sure they send the post to your Mum or something, as you don't want to come back with a massive CCJ registered against you, should you ever want to buy your own house, that will probably prevent you getting a mortgage. Hence why you need to try a bit of diplomacy first, but dont let it get in the way of your life!

Good Luck.

Quote from: redundo612 on May 15, 2014, 02:39:55 PMOr can I prove that it is unfair to put in a lock in clause of 6 months in the second contract as there was already one in the iniatial tenancy agreement?

You have signed a new fixed term agreement with a break clause. It's a bit unfair to describe it as a lock-in clause because its purpose is to work both ways - to provide both parties with a get-out and to provide both parties with security. For you, you see it as a lock-in clause, but another Tenant would see it as an ability to plan their life better. A new fixed term AST is not expected to not have any lock-in / break clause... they can and do... it's still a fixed term agreement.

Anyway, as advised, get in touch with your Landlord direct and see whether your Landlord remembers your previous agreement on this and accepts that the Agency (working for her) has gone against her desires / instructions. If so, then the Landlord can elect to let you leave and terminate the agreement early - but that's what it would be - you leaving early, as you have signed a fixed term AST.

All that said, this sounds a little bit like it was intentional... as you moving onto an SPT (monthly rolling) does not imply any party isn't covered by a contract, the same terms and conditions as the AST apply, there's just a different notice period (1 month and 2 months)... so maybe their reasoning behind not wanting to go onto SPT was quite deliberate.

Even if you leave, say in August, you do not have to pay rent until October - that would never fly. You can assist the Landlord in getting a new, acceptable, Tenant and put them in your place, or you can agree to pay rent until a new suitable Tenant is found - the Landlord is not OK to just leave the property empty until October - they must try to get a new Tenant as quickly as possible and then they can start charging them rent - but you might also be liable for re-letting fees (something the Agency will be keen on, no doubt... double-bubble!).