Landlord asked me to leave, what compensation to ask for?

[Whooo]

I’m in my 20s and moved to London 5 years ago for work - renting the same apartment since.

My landlord wants to sell the apartment and issued an invalid Section 21 notice. I don’t believe this notice is valid as my deposit isn’t protected, so I mentioned it to my landlord in confusion. I added that I am happy to negotiate as ultimately I don’t want housing stress over my head.

They basically came back with a response to say, they really want vacant possession asap and are really wanting to avoid court. they have asked me if I’m willing to move out this month and essentially help them out so they can sell the property immediately as they need the money from the sale. As a starting offer they have said they will immediately refund the deposit.

I’m willing to engage with this but I am also thinking this isn’t enough. What would you ask for to facilitate this?

• for example, Royal Mail redirection costs
• I work fully from home, and to get my internet switched over will lead to me not having service for 3 days which will impact on my ability to work.
• Costs of moving my furniture/belongings and having to potentially put into storage as most places come furnished

just wanted to get feedback on if there is anything else I have missed, as it’s a stressful situation

You want it in writing, in a document you both sign, that you and the landlord have mutually agreed to end the tenancy early and that he has agreed to pay £X as compensation to you and to provide you with a reference, etc, etc.

The problem with taking it to court is that this will drag on forever, with the insecurity and stress (and legal costs?) that will go alongside it. Who needs that?

I've been an accidental landlord desperate to get rid of a property (but completely legally, with the deposit registered etc) and to be honest, I'd happily have handed over some cash to encourage the tenants to leave, if they hadn't abided by the S21.

So yes, he's broken the law and he knows if, and he also wants to get rid of the property asap. I don't know how much the deposit is, but I'd be pointing out to him what the court would be likely to award you (after he'd had to pay for legal advice and representation) and suggest that he might want to avoid the latter and just pay you 3x the deposit.

Far from it - they're entitled to up to three times the deposit amount as well as their deposit back since it's not protected, and that's just the starting point. They also don't have to go anywhere at this stage so hold the cards - I think their requests are pretty modest!

OP has already stated that she will be in a position to buy soon so is not really wanting or needing another rental.

The LL has committed a very serious offence by not protecting your deposit *Deregulation Act 2015) and you have him over a barrel. I would stay after the S21 expires then he will have to apply for a court date. That could take 6 months. Then I would spring it on him in court about the missing deposit. The S21 will fail and he will have to pay the costs and apply for another court date. So a few more months to wait. In the meantime OP may be in a position to buy. She doesnt owe him anything. She has paid his mortgage for the last 5 years or whatever and been his little piggy bank.

I thought the OP had said this, but can't find where now. Apologies if this isn't the case. I may be getting confused with another post.
Maybe OP will clarify?

If the LL wants to sell this is how they go about it. They haven’t done anything wrong. If you refuse to leave it will go to court and he will win and you’ll lose your deposit. Just negotiate a slightly longer date to leave so you’ve got time to organise yourself.

This!
Tenants like this!

Of course it can. If she refused to leave it would have to go to court for him to obtain the legal right to send in an eviction team and change the locks.

I’m sure it won’t come to that.

In reality, nobody does very much about an unprotected deposit except the court will force the LL to pay it back with a bit extra compo

Yes, landlords do need to comply with all regulations. That cost will obviously be passed on to the tenant. The cost of insuring/self-insuring against a tenant taking the piss for 6 months likewise.

That's just natural consequences.

And the more our culture becomes that tenants should always take the piss and squeeze legaly permitted - but morally unjustified - 'compensation' out of landlords, the more rents will go up.

It might put prices down a bit, @MO0N, but the tenants who are suffering from the rising rents still won't be in a position to buy. Even less so, after years of paying rent set at a level to cover the costs of bad tenants.

Basically, excessive regulations mean that good tenants (who don't take the piss) carry the cost of bad tenants (who do - and force rents up to cover their bad behaviour).

It's correct. You must issue safety certificates to your tenant. I'm a landlord and I do this as it's the law to do so.

Just move

Basically greedy landlords cannot be trusted to follow even the most minimal regulations so it has had to become very slightly more regulated, and still so many of them take the piss. Decent landlords have to pay the price for greedy, amoral pigs who have no decency at all and treat tenants like crap.

Fixed that for ya!

OP hasn’t mentioned the certificate nor that she hasn’t received the details, nothing about what I said is untrue, atm it’s all hypothetical until OP can ascertain the facts.

yeah, just approach who you get post from individually and change your details.

How close are you to being able to buy a property, OP?

Because it seems likely, if you hold your ground, they won't be able to evict you at all and you could stay put, which would obviously be a lot easier for you. Personally, I wouldn't want to be there more than another year with an unwilling Landlord, though.

I don't think negotiating compensation is a bad idea. It doesn't really matter if the Landlord thinks you're trying to fleece them (though I don't think you are).

I would be asking for moving costs (including someone to pack and unpack), your deposit back in full, a good reference, mail redirect also seems reasonable, and two or three of days of pay to cover the time it's going to take you to find a new place and move, and 3 days of rent free occupancy of your current place for the 3 day switch over while you get Internet etc. set up. I would also look around and see what prices are for similar properties now and if there's a significant difference then I would ask for that difference for the number of months left of your fixed term. Once costs are calculated I'd ask for 20% on top as a good faith gesture to incentivise you to move. I think that's a reasonable non-fleecing amount. I would expect some push back but moving house is stressful and expensive and I would make that very clear when negotiating.

Make sure your compensation is properly noted in a deed of surrender that you and the landlord sign and get witnessed so you can claim anything he fails to provide in advance and the landlord can't come after you for unpaid rent.

I wouldn't make the deposit protection compensation part of the deal. Put in a claim for that later. If they aren't a professional landlord (which sounds likely?) you probably won't get 3 times the amount, but you should be able to get it for each breach. So if you've had 5 fixed term contracts over the last 5 years, that's 5 lots of compensation. You can claim for deposit breach compensation for 6 years.

Has he been a good landlord? To me, that is the important question and I can't see it raised in this thread.

Have you been happy living there and have problems been attended to within a reasonable time? If so, then I would be fair in return.

Given the unexpected request to vacate without usual notice, I think it's fair for you to ask for something extra for your inconvenience. But those suggesting 3X the deposit are being unreasonable, grasping, and are what's wrong with Britain!

The first post establishes that he's not been a good landlord? The OP says he hasn't protected the deposit. That's really serious.

However 'nice' someone may seem, if they don't fulfil their basic legal obligations, you need to be very wary of them. What else are they neglecting to do? What sort of principles do they have?

I would not trust this LL at all.

And no, it isn't 'grasping' to suggest the deposit multiple. The OP may or may not get it - I suspect she will - but it's really basic. That's how the system is supposed to work: if the deposit is not protected, there is a penalty. Unfortunately, some people will always try to play the system, and that is why now there are rules about protecting a tenant's deposit.

No, it’s the nickel and diming attitude. Just go in for the 3x deposit multiple rather than thinking “oh, but I’ll have to buy a stamp to post a letter because of this”

When every other person in the world moves, you don’t invoice your landlord or buyer your moving costs, do you

It's the expectation to simply get away with breaking the law without consequence attitude. And the idea that a tenant who rightly pursues the costs they are entitled to claim as a result is somehow 'doing the poor landlord over'. It's quite the reach.

To all those who say let the legal process do it's course- do you realise the legal process won't run it's course unless the OP starts it rolling?
If the OP doesn't start either negotiations about the deposit or legal proceedings themselves, nothing happens.
If the OP decides not to do anything, the landlord, who has broken the law, gets away with it.
There is no external company checking that landlords have been following the law.

And why are people worried that the landlord will think they're trying to fleece them? The landlord who has BROKEN THE LAW?

I think everyone realises?

@Whooo in your situation, my first questions would be:
Do I have somewhere to go?
How much short am I on a deposit?

If you feel good enough morally about negotiating (I would, and I am a private landlord, and I work in a letting agent setting), then do it.
Don't ask for your mail being redirected. Honestly, that's about £50 or something stupid, and you are saving the landlord thousands and thousands of pounds. Aim higher.

Where I would stand is:
My full deposit back now, upfront
An extra 1x the deposit
3 months rent on whatever a new place would be, to give you a bit of time to save what you need.
A solid reference.
And in return you will leave by the end of the month (if you have somewhere to go).

If they are not agreeable, would point out that:
The current section 21 isn't valid
The deposit isn't protected and the law states that the court would award you a refund + 1-3 X the amount again
A new section 21 would have to be issued after it has been refunded/ protected, which is 8 weeks
The court process is currently taking the best part of the year to go through
It will cost them a decent amount of money
And, if you want to be an arse, insinuate that you may stop paying rent after the section 21 has gone through (morally, I'm not on board with that one).

If you are going to negotiate, then please negotiate for something worth it.
If I was in your landlords situation, and someone came to me with what you're asking, I would bite their hand off and have them out the door in a jiffy. He's done wrong, and he's waited til the last minute to sort this before the new regulations come in to try and sort it, so play him at his own game.

Landlord threads alway bring out MNers who are in desperate need of some pearls to clutch.