Notice Period For Tenants

MaxGenius

Can anyone advise how much notice a landlord needs to give to vacate a property when tenants have been there for 6 years?

My brother has received a letter from his letting agent stating the landlord has decided to sell the property. It says he'll need to move out within the next few weeks and facilitate viewing of the property in the meantime.

I thought the letter was a bit vague and perhaps he was entitled to a bit more time. Any information appreciated.

Milk & Honey

MaxGenius wrote: »

Can anyone advise how much notice a landlord needs to give to vacate a property when tenants have been there for 6 years?

My brother has received a letter from his letting agent stating the landlord has decided to sell the property. It says he'll need to move out within the next few weeks and facilitate viewing of the property in the meantime.

I thought the letter was a bit vague and perhaps he was entitled to a bit more time. Any information appreciated.

112 days. He is not obliged to facilitate viewings.

questionmark?

MaxGenius wrote: »

It says he'll need to move out within the next few weeks and facilitate viewing of the property in the meantime.

I thought the letter was a bit vague and perhaps he was entitled to a bit more time.

The estate agent is a right Tommy Cooper aren't they

Milk & Honey wrote: »

112 days. He is not obliged to facilitate viewings.

This!

Merch

the notice is as mentioned, 112 days
Id have thought facilitating viewings for new tenants would be reasonable and is expected, not sure for a sale.

A valid termination must have all the prerequisites

aN.Droid

Staying in their for six years allows him a period of 112 days notice from date of valid notification.

Valid notification has not been tendered yet.

Your brother is only obliged to allow the landlord access for inspections and not viewings. And this has to be under the tenants terms usually.

Allot of people in this situation would make a deal with the landlord such as allowing the tenant live rent free until suitable accommodation was found in the same price bracket and of the same quality and convenience. I would also expect the landlord to pay for any costs incurred because of the move such as moving vans.

Hope I helped here.

The_Conductor

I'd agree with Limericks to a certain extent- if your brother agrees to facilitate viewings by prospective purchasers- he is entitled to some sort of recompense, as he has no obligation towards said prospective purchasers.

Note- any possessions on view in the property will by and large be his- having random strangers wandering through the property is a risk he is assuming- and if his possessions were to vanish- given the people will have been invited into the home- his insurance is not liable.

Vis-a-vis a contributions towards a moving van etc- not a hope on earth. He is a tenant- and regardless of how good a tenant he his, his landlord's obligation towards him is to serve valid termination of tenancy- nothing more nothing less.

I'd see if I could get maybe a week or two rent-free in lieu of allowing viewings- once valid notice has been served, however getting a van for moving etc is a little overly ambitious (ask though- who knows, maybe the landlord may be happy to do it, he has no obligation whatsoever to do so, but no harm in asking). You do have him over a barrel regarding viewings- *unless its specified in his lease- in which case whatever the clause in the lease states, is law.

112 days it is........

Edit- just thinking- the apartment cannot be sold without vacant possession. Your brother could offer to sell the o/s notice to the landlord (aka the o/s portion of the notice, not served- and get looking for somewhere new pronto? Its done regularly on a commercial lease- not so frequently on residential leases.

odds_on

If he has a fixed term lease, there is no notice period as a fixed term cannot be broken. However, a notice of termination may be issued (112 days) during the fixed term to expire after the fixed term has finished.

The_Conductor

odds_on wrote: »

If he has a fixed term lease, there is no notice period as a fixed term cannot be broken. However, a notice of termination may be issued (112 days) during the fixed term to expire after the fixed term has finished.

If its fixed term- either party can advise the other, before the elapse of the fixed term, of the intention not to renew at the elapse of the fixed term- and providing this notice was sufficient to cover the statutory notice- vacant possession could be expected on the elapse of the fixed term- there is no reason the 112 days would be incremented onto the fixed term, and if he has been a tenant for 6 years, its not automatically a Part 4 (in which case there would be no fixed term in any event- just the straight 112 days notice).

Statutory notice is not an additional right on top of rights granted by lease- provided the minimum statutory terms are covered, that is all that is required.

The issue here is the estate agent and/or landlord- seem to have no understanding of what their statutory obligations are.

Milk & Honey

odds_on wrote: »

If he has a fixed term lease, there is no notice period as a fixed term cannot be broken. However, a notice of termination may be issued (112 days) during the fixed term to expire after the fixed term has finished.

There is a view among some adjudicators in the PRTB, which I have seen applied, that a notice to terminate cannot be served during a fixed term even if it expires after the end of the fixed term. Dr. Aine Ryall has commented on this ambiguity and complained that the Act has not been amended to clarify the position.

MaxGenius

Thank you all for the advice and information, it's greatly appreciated.

aN.Droid

smccarrick wrote: »

Note- any possessions on view in the property will by and large be his- having random strangers wandering through the property is a risk he is assuming- and if his possessions were to vanish- given the people will have been invited into the home- his insurance is not liable.

I think you misunderstood me.

I was tying to say that if the tenant where to move out earlier then notice then the landlord should offer to pay for his move.

Quite reasonable to be honest.

The_Conductor

Limericks wrote: »

I think you misunderstood me.

I was tying to say that if the tenant where to move out earlier then notice then the landlord should offer to pay for his move.

Quite reasonable to be honest.

You may consider it reasonable. Its actually highly unusual. Whether the landlord considers it fair or not- neither of us will probably ever know. The situation is currently messed up- because the estate agent hasn't a bog about tenancy law- and valid notice of termination of tenancy has yet to be served. Whether it suits the current tenant to move in 30 days, rather than in 112 days- who knows, perhaps it won't better suit them one way or the other- we just don't know enough.