Renting a house that is for sale

darrcow

hi ive been rent a house for over 8 years. the landlord has had the house up for sale for approx 19 month and it has been sale agreed for the last 5 months. the house has now been sold and the landlord wants us to move out a.s.a.p. so what is the minimum notice he needs to give us

thanks

Bigcheeze

Assuming your lease has expired it's 16 weeks minimum notice.

Milk & Honey

darrcow wrote: »

hi ive been rent a house for over 8 years. the landlord has had the house up for sale for approx 19 month and it has been sale agreed for the last 5 months. the house has now been sold and the landlord wants us to move out a.s.a.p. so what is the minimum notice he needs to give us

thanks

112 days.

SBWife

I believe it is 16 weeks.

djimi

If you do have a current fixed term lease then the landlord cannot ask you to lease until the lease has ended. The new owners buy the house with you as a sitting tenants; they become the landlord and are bound to the terms of the signed lease.

As others have said, if you are on a part 4 tenancy then they must give you 112 days.

Of course, in either situation you are free to negotiate a shorter notice period if you so wish.

odds_on

djimi wrote: »

If you do have a current fixed term lease then the landlord cannot ask you to lease until the lease has ended. The new owners buy the house with you as a sitting tenants; they become the landlord and are bound to the terms of the signed lease.

As others have said, if you are on a part 4 tenancy then they must give you 112 days.

Of course, in either situation you are free to negotiate a shorter notice period if you so wish.

However, a tenant who has had, say 3 consecutive fixed term leases, acquired his Part 4 rights after the first 6 months of the first term. At the end of the third fixed term, although, the fixed term has expired, the tenant has the right to remain for another year.

Therefore, a landlord, wanting to regain possession, must issue a valid Notice of Termination giving the tenant the required period of notice as related to his period of occupancy. The Notice may be issued during the fixed term, to expire on the final day of the fixed term.

djimi

odds_on wrote: »

However, a tenant who has had, say 3 consecutive fixed term leases, acquired his Part 4 rights after the first 6 months of the first term. At the end of the third fixed term, although, the fixed term has expired, the tenant has the right to remain for another year.

Run that by me again? I thought under a part 4 the longest notice period a tenant could get is 112 days (for 4+ years)?

odds_on

djimi wrote: »

Run that by me again? I thought under a part 4 the longest notice period a tenant could get is 112 days (for 4+ years)?

You are correct, the longest notice period that a tenant has to be given is 112 days.

The point, which I have badly tried to point out, is that it does not just apply to a Part 4 tenancy, but also to consecutive Fixed Term agreements.

If a landlord wants to regain possession he must give the tenant the required notice period even though a fixed term agreement terminates at the end of the fixed term. Thus, if a tenant has had 4 x 1 year fixed term leases, the landlord is required to give 112 days notice period which may expire on the last day of the fixed term - though he must also comply with the grounds for termination.

djimi

It was the part "At the end of the third fixed term, although, the fixed term has expired, the tenant has the right to remain for another year." that confused me; at the end of the third fixed term the tenant has the right to remain for, at most, 112 days, not another year (assuming a further fixed term is not signed of course, and in this case its safe to say it wouldnt be offered).

SBWife

It's probably important to note that although you can stay for 16 weeks, you might offer to leave before this term expires especially if the landlord offers some compensation for leaving. Eg. I'll leave after two months if you waive the rent for those two months, could be a way of making everyone happy.

odds_on

djimi wrote: »

It was the part "At the end of the third fixed term, although, the fixed term has expired, the tenant has the right to remain for another year." that confused me; at the end of the third fixed term the tenant has the right to remain for, at most, 112 days, not another year (assuming a further fixed term is not signed of course, and in this case its safe to say it wouldnt be offered).

Under which law, or reasoning, could a tenant, who has had 3 continuous 1 year fixed term leases, only stay for another 112 days?

Under the RTA, after 6 months in occupation, irrespective of the type of tenancy, he has the right to remain for a further 3.5 year, making 4 years in all. After that, he can have a new fixed term or a "Further Part 4" tenancy. If he chooses another fixed term, he also has a "Further Part 4" running concurrently.

SBWife

odds_on wrote: »

Under which law, or reasoning, could a tenant, who has had 3 continuous 1 year fixed term leases, only stay for another 112 days?

Under the RTA, after 6 months in occupation, irrespective of the type of tenancy, he has the right to remain for a further 3.5 year, making 4 years in all. After that, he can have a new fixed term or a "Further Part 4" tenancy. If he chooses another fixed term, he also has a "Further Part 4" running concurrently.

There are a bunch of exceptions to the right to remain during a Part 4 tenancy, these include major renovations or the landlord needs to use the property for himself or a close family member, or if he intends to sell the property. They are all detailed in the Residential Tenancies Act of 2004

djimi

odds_on wrote: »

Under which law, or reasoning, could a tenant, who has had 3 continuous 1 year fixed term leases, only stay for another 112 days?

Under the RTA, after 6 months in occupation, irrespective of the type of tenancy, he has the right to remain for a further 3.5 year, making 4 years in all. After that, he can have a new fixed term or a "Further Part 4" tenancy. If he chooses another fixed term, he also has a "Further Part 4" running concurrently.

The OP is asking how much notice the landlord must give if they want to sell the property. My initial post was making reference to the fact that on a part 4 tenancy if the landlord wants to sell the property then they can give the tenant the appropriate notice to vacate (in this case 112 days).

odds_on

Quote:
Originally Posted by djimi
If you do have a current fixed term lease then the landlord cannot ask you to lease until the lease has ended. The new owners buy the house with you as a sitting tenants; they become the landlord and are bound to the terms of the signed lease.

As others have said, if you are on a part 4 tenancy then they must give you 112 days.

Of course, in either situation you are free to negotiate a shorter notice period if you so wish.

However, a tenant who has had, say 3 consecutive fixed term leases, acquired his Part 4 rights after the first 6 months of the first term. At the end of the third fixed term, although, the fixed term has expired, the tenant has the right to remain for another year.

Therefore, a landlord, wanting to regain possession, must issue a valid Notice of Termination giving the tenant the required period of notice as related to his period of occupancy. The Notice may be issued during the fixed term, to expire on the final day of the fixed term.

I think we are misunderstanding each other.

As others have said, if you are on a part 4 tenancy then they must give you 112 days.

The 112 days notice period does not just apply to a Part 4 tenancy, it also applies to consecutive fixed term tenancies of 4 years or more.

djimi

Im sorry man, I havent got a clue what you mean by that! Are you saying that if you have been on a fixed term lease for 4 years or more the landlord can ask you to leave with 112 days notice, even if you are still under a fixed term lease?

Put it in the context of the OP; the tenants have been there for 8 years. If we are to assume that they are not on a fixed term then how much notice is the OP entitled to? Is it 112 days as is my understanding of the part 4 tenancy, or is it something else?

odds_on

djimi wrote: »

Im sorry man, I havent got a clue what you mean by that! Are you saying that if you have been on a fixed term lease for 4 years or more the landlord can ask you to leave with 112 days notice, even if you are still under a fixed term lease?

Put it in the context of the OP; the tenants have been there for 8 years. If we are to assume that they are not on a fixed term then how much notice is the OP entitled to? Is it 112 days as is my understanding of the part 4 tenancy, or is it something else?

If a tenant has a Part 4 tenancy, and has been in occupation for more than 4 years, the landlord may issue a Notice of termination giving 112 days notice (based on at least one of the grounds as set out in the RTA).

If a tenant has a Fixed Term tenancy, and has been in occupation for more than 4 years, the landlord may issue a Notice of termination giving 112 days notice (based on at least one of the grounds as set out in the RTA) but the end of the notice period cannot arrive before the end of the fixed term i.e. the fixed term must have expired.

djimi

Ah gotcha. So basically you are saying to them that they will be vacating the property at the end of the current fixed term lease? That makes sense.

Its something Ive wondered about actually; I knew that the part 4 ran in parallel with the fixed term lease but I was never sure if notice periods could be issued during the fixed term, or if they didnt take effect until the fixed term expired.

darrcow

the landlord has served me with a letter of notice for 1 month what do i do now

goat2

i think it is one month notice, when the house has been sold, or is about to be sold,
there are different rules between when a property is being sold or changing hands, to when a property is not being sold.
i read this somewhere a couple yrs ago,

SBWife

darrcow wrote: »

the landlord has served me with a letter of notice for 1 month what do i do now

Contact Threshold, they'll let you know whether you should bring a case to the PTRB.

djimi

darrcow wrote: »

the landlord has served me with a letter of notice for 1 month what do i do now

You are entitled to 112 days notice if you have been there 4+ years. If it does not suit you to move out in a month then send him a link to the citizens information website outlining your rights as a tenant and tell him to come back to you when he has educated himself of his obligations as a landlord.

djimi

goat2 wrote: »

i think it is one month notice, when the house has been sold, or is about to be sold,
there are different rules between when a property is being sold or changing hands, to when a property is not being sold.
i read this somewhere a couple yrs ago,

I would have thought that if the landlord did not ask the tenants to vacate before the property was sold and the new owners got the keys with the tenants in situ then the new owners have got themselves sitting tenants and take over the lease to become the landlord. They can then exercise their right to ask the tenants to vacate as they need the property for their own use, but they are bound by a part 4 tenancy just as the old landlord was, and they must give the tenants appropriate notice; in this case 112 days?

Milk & Honey

goat2 wrote: »

i think it is one month notice, when the house has been sold, or is about to be sold,
there are different rules between when a property is being sold or changing hands, to when a property is not being sold.
i read this somewhere a couple yrs ago,

That is not correct. the notice periods are the same no matter what the reason for the termination.

Milk & Honey

djimi wrote: »

I would have thought that if the landlord did not ask the tenants to vacate before the property was sold and the new owners got the keys with the tenants in situ then the new owners have got themselves sitting tenants and take over the lease to become the landlord. They can then exercise their right to ask the tenants to vacate as they need the property for their own use, but they are bound by a part 4 tenancy just as the old landlord was, and they must give the tenants appropriate notice; in this case 112 days?

Most sales are subject to vacant possession. The purchasers won't hand over the money until the tenants are gone. This is quite sensible. Why should they take on all the problems of having tenants in situ in a house they are buying to live in themselves?

djimi

Milk & Honey wrote: »

Most sales are subject to vacant possession. The purchasers won't hand over the money until the tenants are gone. This is quite sensible. Why should they take on all the problems of having tenants in situ in a house they are buying to live in themselves?

Thats not the tenants problem though. The OP is entitled to 4 months notice; the landlord should have thought of this before going sale agreed. How the landlord handles this is their own problem; either they wait until the notice period is up to hand over the keys, or the they hand over the keys to the buyer with the understanding that they cannot move in straight away.

The terms of the sale in no way influence the tenants rights.