Is tenant legally liable to pay final rental period rent in full

[Solar99]

My tenants moved into my rental property on October 3rd several years ago. They were on a 6 month fixed assured shorthold tenancy agreement which changed to a periodic monthly AST after the first 6 months were up.

They served notice to quit this year on September 6th. In the tenancy agreement it states that the tenant must give one calendar month's written notice.

They moved out on October 6th. However by law are they liable to pay the full rent for this new rental period of 3rd October - 2nd November?

The letting agency who manages the property for me told them they could pay pro rata for the final rental period. The letting agency did not discuss any of this with me in advance and the tenant's are now refusing to pay the rent in full for the final rental period.

So they served one month's notice but they did not serve the notice on the last day or the first day of the rental period so I think by law I an entitled to ask for the outstanding rent. They also did not ask, and I did not agree to them only paying rent for the 3rd, 4th, 5th ad 6th of October. The letting agency arranged this with them with no consent from me.

The tenants have left the house with a lot of damage so I'm trying to calculate total costs in case I need to go to small claims court etc.

[wowfudge]

The tenants have acted in good faith based on what the letting agent has told them. Your argument is with the letting agent unless who appears to have handled matters without regard to your wishes.

It is a grey area whether a month's notice at any time is acceptable or not. But really, in the scheme of things you knew they would be out in a month and they have paid the rent.

Was there a proper inventory drawn up when the tenants moved in and has a formal check out been carried out? Is their deposit properly protected?

[wowfudge]

Stray unless!

[lalalonglegs]

The law changed a couple of years ago so that LLs don't have to give notice on the day rent is due, I assume the same thing happened for tenants too. I believe it was part of the Deregulations Act.

[Solar99]

wowfudge - yes the deposit is properly protected. Yes there was a proper inventory drawn up at the beginning. Yes check out was a formal process.

lalalonglegs - no the deregulation act 2015 only applies to LLs - not tenants.

[lalalonglegs]

Apologies in that case .

[wowfudge]

I think the fact that your agents have allowed them to give a month's notice which is not a rental period, but close to it actually makes you look very reasonable as the LL. If they have it in writing from the agent, it won't stand up in court if you try to argue it.

You can of course sue the agent for breach of contract if they are in breach of what was agreed between you.

[Santawontbelong]

We moved out a few days over the alloted time and paid ll a weeks rent.

[namechangedtoday15]

I think your tenants legally have to give you at least a month's notice to coincide with a whole rental period, so based on your dates, they'd have been liable for rent until 2nd November. Your agents were not, on the face of it, entitled to agree to a shorter period without your authorisation. You need to check the terms of your contract with the agent to see what their parameters were but it's clear your dispute is with the agent and not the tenants. They've acted in good faith and paid what they were told by the agents they were liable to pay.