Notice Period and Viewings Query

rogercross

So I've decided not to renew when my lease comes to an end in February, what i would like to know is how much in advance notice do i need to give my LL that i won't be renewing based on rent review received, and also how much control do i have over viewings, i have no desire to have strangers walking around the place when my stuff is still there and i'm not around to supervise.

Any thoughts or comments please let me know.

Michael D Not Higgins

You have no obligation to let strangers or the landlord in for viewings, although it might help your relationship with the landlord around the notice period and getting a reference.

You notice period is based on the length of time you have been in occupation. How long are you living there? What's your current lease agreement? When did you receive the rent review?

rogercross

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

You have no obligation to let strangers or the landlord in for viewings, although it might help your relationship with the landlord around the notice period and getting a reference.

You notice period is based on the length of time you have been in occupation. How long are you living there? What's your current lease agreement? When did you receive the rent review?

Been there 3 years, new 12 month lease each year signed. Received review 2 weeks ago

Michael D Not Higgins

rogercross wrote: »

Been there 3 years, new 12 month lease each year signed. Received review 2 weeks ago

You have to give at least 8 weeks notice. When was your last rent review?

rogercross

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

You have to give at least 8 weeks notice. When was your last rent review?

2 years ago so they're well within their rights to do so.

misstearheus

Are you allowed to refuse Landlord entry to show around prospective Tenants? Think I remember it being written as part of Contract for me in a couple of places over the years. Have always obliged anyway anytime I've moved on or Landlord sold up, reason being, to keep the peach, albeit it is annoying but wouldn't have refused them showing people around at reasonable times with some notice given to me. It is a bit of pain but never knew that you could refuse them to show people around while you're still living there.

The_Conductor

Yes- the OP is under no obligation whatsoever to facilitate viewings- he/she is entitled to peaceful enjoyment of their home, until the termination of the tenancy.

Claw Hammer

There is no requirement on a tenant to give notice when a fixed term tenancy is coming to an end.

Michael D Not Higgins

Claw Hammer wrote: »

There is no requirement on a tenant to give notice when a fixed term tenancy is coming to an end.

By sections 36 and 37 of the RTA 2004 there is. Technically they can leave and tell the landlord they have left and that counts as the termination by the tenant but they are still liable for rent for the notice period:

"37. (4) Nothing in the preceding subsections affects the liability of the tenant for rent for the period that would have elapsed had a notice of termination giving the required period of notice been served by him or her."

rogercross

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

By sections 36 and 37 of the RTA 2004 there is. Technically they can leave and tell the landlord they have left and that counts as the termination by the tenant but they are still liable for rent for the notice period:

"37. (4) Nothing in the preceding subsections affects the liability of the tenant for rent for the period that would have elapsed had a notice of termination giving the required period of notice been served by him or her."

I just want to be there if/when there are viewings, just for the purpose of keeping an eye on my belongings, call me paranoid or just generally distrusting :-) I don't want to have to empty the place completely out maybe a month before i'm leaving, few days is all that will take.

Michael D Not Higgins

rogercross wrote: »

I just want to be there if/when there are viewings, just for the purpose of keeping an eye on my belongings, call me paranoid or just generally distrusting :-) I don't want to have to empty the place completely out maybe a month before i'm leaving, few days is all that will take.

I'd get in touch with the landlord and tell him you'll only agree to viewings at a time that suits you so you can keep an eye on your stuff. Also agree to a minimum notice period before a viewing (24 hours). We've had people agree with the landlord that they could do viewings, then the letting agent just shows up with half an hour's notice.

Claw Hammer

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

By sections 36 and 37 of the RTA 2004 there is. Technically they can leave and tell the landlord they have left and that counts as the termination by the tenant but they are still liable for rent for the notice period:

"37. (4) Nothing in the preceding subsections affects the liability of the tenant for rent for the period that would have elapsed had a notice of termination giving the required period of notice been served by him or her."

That is inconsistent with Section 195.
195.—(1) In this section “relevant dwelling” means a dwelling, the subject of a tenancy that is for a fixed period of at least 6 months.

(2) The tenant of a relevant dwelling, if he or she intends to remain (on whatever basis, if any, that is open to him or her to do so) in occupation of the dwelling after the expiry of the period of the tenancy concerned, shall notify the landlord of that intention.

(3) That notification shall not be made to the landlord—

(a) any later than 1 month before, nor

(b) any sooner than 3 months before,

the expiry of the period of that tenancy.

(4) If a tenant fails to comply with subsection (2) and the landlord suffers loss or damage in consequence of that failure the landlord may make a complaint to the Board under Part 6 that he or she has suffered such loss or damage.

(5) An adjudicator or the Tribunal, on the hearing of such a complaint, may make a determination, if the adjudicator or the Tribunal considers it proper to do so, that the tenant shall pay to the complainant an amount by way of damages for that loss or damage.


That clearly implies the tenant only has to give notice that he intends to stay on. Notice is only required if there is no fixed term.

Michael D Not Higgins

Claw Hammer wrote: »

That is inconsistent with Section 195.
195.—(1) In this section “relevant dwelling” means a dwelling, the subject of a tenancy that is for a fixed period of at least 6 months.

(2) The tenant of a relevant dwelling, if he or she intends to remain (on whatever basis, if any, that is open to him or her to do so) in occupation of the dwelling after the expiry of the period of the tenancy concerned, shall notify the landlord of that intention.

(3) That notification shall not be made to the landlord—

(a) any later than 1 month before, nor

(b) any sooner than 3 months before,

the expiry of the period of that tenancy.

(4) If a tenant fails to comply with subsection (2) and the landlord suffers loss or damage in consequence of that failure the landlord may make a complaint to the Board under Part 6 that he or she has suffered such loss or damage.

(5) An adjudicator or the Tribunal, on the hearing of such a complaint, may make a determination, if the adjudicator or the Tribunal considers it proper to do so, that the tenant shall pay to the complainant an amount by way of damages for that loss or damage.


That clearly implies the tenant only has to give notice that he intends to stay on. Notice is only required if there is no fixed term.

That's notice to remain, and doesn't preclude required notice of termination which is covered by sections 36 and 37.

Claw Hammer

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

That's notice to remain, and doesn't preclude required notice of termination which is covered by sections 36 and 37.

There would be no need for notice to remain if notice of termination was required. Notice to remain could be inferred from the absence of a notice of termination. In interpretation it is presumed that the statute is always speaking and that there is no surplusage.

Michael D Not Higgins

Claw Hammer wrote: »

There would be no need for notice to remain if notice of termination was required. Notice to remain could be inferred from the absence of a notice of termination. In interpretation it is presumed that the statute is always speaking and that there is no surplusage.

There are two things being talked about in the RTA 2004, a fixed term lease and the Part 4 tenancy. These operate concurrently after 6 months in occupation. Section 195 is about notice to remain after the lease has run out and notice to terminate is required for a Part 4 tenancy.

4ensic15

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

There are two things being talked about in the RTA 2004, a fixed term lease and the Part 4 tenancy. These operate concurrently after 6 months in occupation. Section 195 is about notice to remain after the lease has run out and notice to terminate is required for a Part 4 tenancy.

The notice periods are not confined to part 4 tenancies. The question is, why can't notice to continue be inferred from the absence of a notice to terminate?