to think two months notice is a bit shit?

[Miren]

Just heard from a friend that her landlord has given her two months notice to vacate the property she has been renting for the last 5 years. It's come completely out of the blue, and she is so upset. She has 3 children, all in the local school, so, unless she moves schools, she has to find - a scarce - rental in the area, pack up and move, in 8 weeks. She took on the property on the understanding that it was long term enough to see the kids through first school. So sad for her.

Only two parties can bring a tenancy to an end once the fixed-term has ended: either the tenant or a court

That's not correct. The landlord and the tenant both have the right to end the contractual tenancy which the landlord has done(assuming the notice was correct).

What the landlord can't do is remove the tenant physically if the tenant doesn't leave without a court order for removal. The court does not end the tenancy that has already happened if the notice was correct. If the landlord's notice was defective the tenancy hasn't ended and the court won't order eviction.

"There is a clause in the tenancy agreements which allows the LL to inspect and arrange viewings in the last two months of the tenancy."

Landlords can and often do insert shonky clauses in their precious tenancy agreements but that does not make them enforceable.

The tenant has a STATUTORY right to quiet enjoyment and no mere contract can over-ride this.

Definitely contact the LL directly (look in contract or get details from land registry) - this is almost certainly the agent trying it on. When we rented we were constantly having to tell our LL about egregious things the agents were (trying) to do in his name.

And, as others have suggested, in future tell your friend to request a longer notice period from her landlords. We had a 6 month notice both ways on ours - the landlord would have loved for it to have been even longer.

"That's not correct. The landlord and the tenant both have the right to end the contractual tenancy which the landlord has done(assuming the notice was correct)."

Serving the appropriate notice does not end a tenancy! As I said the only way to end a tenancy is either the tenant gives notice, a court grants possession, or by formal mutual agreement. A landlord CANNOT unilaterally end a tenancy.

Not saying that. You are not correct that notices properly served following all statutory procedures do not end the tenancy. You are muddling that up the fact that a landlord cannot remove a tenant without a court order if the tenant doesn't leave.

You are correct that sitting tight will allow a tenant to remain and in the course of the process it may well turn out the notice was defective

She must have known the terms and conditions when she first took on the flat. But on the other hand it will have sent her into a panic with three children at school and all the worry about finding something else suitable. It's horrible for your friend but I don't think the landlord has done anything wrong. I suppose they could have warned her that they might be thinking about giving her notice but would that have helped because she would still be insecure.

She should tell the owner she wants a realistic time to find a place and move. Suggest 3/4 months. The LL has a home she doesn't!

I'd not ever suggest a tenant sits tight. The landlord has very limited ways to reacts but they can still do some things. The tenant may be racking up additional costs that they would need to cover.

Then the LL can chose to be very fussy and apply the inventory strictly and charge everything they can to the tenant.

Lastly, the LL needs to settle the deposit details within reasonable time. They may not feel as inclined to gather quotes and settle as quickly as they might which would mean a delay in the tenant getting their deposit back.

The LL would also be be less inclined to give a good reference.

I agree that the landlord hasn't "done anything wrong" but in this articular instance I suspect the agent is behind this in order to charge fat fees.

One particular way to concentrate the landlord's mind, if he's not intent on selling (and we can almost guarantee that the letting-agent has an estate-agent arm of the organisation waiting in the wings ready to charge a percentage of the selling-price) is to not consent to any viewings until the tenancy has ended. Causing a void-period between tenancies could and often does negate any uplift in rent over, say, a year.

She should tell the owner she wants a realistic time to find a place and move Suggest 3/4 months. The LL has a home she doesn't!

She has been given a reasonable time span
She probably agreed to it when she signed the agreement. Just because it doesn't suit now doesn't mean to say its not right.

OP - does your friend have her Landlord's contact details, even if she's been told by the letting agent not to go direct? If so, she should ignore them contact the landlord and ask if there's any flexibility at the end of the tenancy, if she lined up somewhere else then for the sake of 1 or 2 weeks, they will probably be flexible because they know going to court could be a nightmare for them.

Also worth in that converstaion asking if it's because they've realised the market rental levels are higher and they want to remarket higher. In that case, rather than pay an extra 50% to a new landlord, could she afford to 'split the difference' and offer a higher rate to the landlord?

The letting agent might not care if there's a couple of months void, or if there's a new tenant who'll trash the place, if they can remarket it much higher and get a higher fee. The landlord might take the decision that a bit higher but keeping a good tenant with no couple of months break might be worth removing the hassle.

Obviously, this might not be the issue, it might be that the landlord wants/needs to sell, or they have a family member/friend who wants to move into the house, or even they want to move in themselves, but it's worth a shot of asking.

Also agree with flipchart, if there's a property she wants to move into then a month is enough time to do it, 2 months is enough to find somewhere and move.

An extra 2 months would just mean she can't really look for properties now as she's not ready to move and can't afford to pay 2 lots of rent, and she's still going to end up moving in around 4-6 weeks from finding a property.

2 months is enough to find somewhere and move

Not so. Not where i am. I searched for over 18 months to find the house i am in now and even then it was above my budget but i had to take it because my tenancy was ending.

suburbanrhonda - just seen your post.

not your personal fault, obviously, and a diversion but the ongoing building on flood plains and the fact that people will buy these places is just criminal. If our government woke up and stopped this, a lot of misery would be saved. Meanwhile there are properties sitting empty and deteriorating in towns and cities, with transport links, work, schools etc etc. These could be renovated to a high standard and turned into badly needed homes. If only there were incentives such as no VAT on refurbishments, insulation, new heating systems rather than throwing all the incentives at the builders of nasty boxes that fill with water.

I live in an area where the Severn floods each winter. But no houses get flooded. Why? Because most of them aren't built in the bits that are known to flood, and those that are have had defences for years. Drive round here and you'll see lots of apparently lovely building land that is empty. Come back in the winter and it will be obvious why!

sorry for diversion. We now return you to the regular programme of 'all landlords are bastards'.

Tenants have no security of tenure bar their fixed term. That families with children settled in school with a network of relations or neighbours around them can be in danger of being moved on and uprooted, possible every six months, means that they all should have a month or maybe six week's-worth of rent as deposit, plus a month's rent in advance, plus all the usual rip-off letting-agent referencing fees, plus removal costs permanently stashed away just in case, is effing borderline criminal in my opinion.

Thanks to the Thatcher government in the 80s which changed the legislation. And the passive Labour arseholes who have done nothing since to change it. That an overwhelming majority of MPs are BTL landlords themselves obviously has nothing to do with it.

yabu it is completely shit. Now ok there is a small number of LL who have unlucky themselves and have become so reluctantly but the majority are well off with homes of their own.

We have threads on here where peeled complain about not being able to afford to buy 'well rent' the smug brigade trill. It's a British thing buying.

Someone moans about having to leave a house in a matter of a few weeks with kids. Cue pearl clutching and trilling of 'well that's the problem with renting'.

The housing (or lack of) in this country is just so fucked up

I hope she can find somewhere op.

Is that really true that, assuming the period of the contract is up and the relevant notice period has been given, only the tenant or a court can end the contract? Seems odd, why sign a contract as a LL if ending if within the terms isn't possible?

Private renting exists all over the world. It has advantages.
You can live in a house and if the boiler breaks down or dry rot is discovered you don't suddenly have to find a chunk of money that you hadn't budgeted for. If the neighbours are shit, the planners give approval for a monstrosity to be built over the road or you need to move with a job you can do so far easier than if you have to sell. If you split up with a partner or a flat share doesn't work out it is again easier and far cheaper than to have to sell and sort out the money. Society needs that market.

Of course there are disadvantages too - and the law is there to protect both parties.

I hope that your friend can find somewhere that suits her. Some useful advice on here. I wouldn't stay on at the end of the tenancy though and force the LL to court though, (unless she really has no option). Stress for everyone.

Seriously can't understand the logic of "private tenancy sucks". Well yes, but any tenancy sucks. If you don't own then your home isn't secure. It's part and parcel of renting.

It is in the short assured tenancy agreement (Scotland) that tenants must allow viewings, with sufficient notice, if property is for sale.

I'm very lucky my tenants have been understanding and lovely with the sale of our property. We have no choice, it is costing us money every month that we don't have for someone else to live in and no we won't make a profit from equity as it dropped in value and hasn't risen back up enough. We will make a large loss. If we didn't have to sell we wouldn't as our tenants are lovely and look after it beautifully. Sometimes landlords don't have a choice and are normal people like us who had to relocate and rent it out as at the time we couldn't have sold it due to housing market being so poor. There are some greedy horrible private landlords but many are normal people like me.

OP I'm sorry that your friend is in this situation, it does utterly suck. Hopefully they will find somewhere else to live soon. Landlord will surely give them glowing reference and may be as flexible as they can to help, as they probably realise what a shit situation it is.

but not everyone can access social housing. It's the people in the middle who can't afford to buy but also aren't eligible for social housing who have no choice.

The disadvantages of private renting are far more lengthy than owning:

• you never own it so have to pay rent for ever
• you get stuck with the manky carpets your landlord put in, ditto washing machine that needs replacing but he insists on mending.
• you have to get permission to redecorate/ put up a picture
• you can't make it your own
• you have to put up with extortionate fees every time the letting agency send you a letter.
• the rent can be put up at very little notice
• you may have to leave at any moment with 2 months notice with risk of being homeless with dcs
• you have to put up with them coming round to 'inspect' when they feel like it.

In fact maybe I'll sell my place and give it a go . Or replace the roof/ sort out the dry rot with the money I have saved over the years via zero interest rates rather than lining a landlord's pocket.

The big issue is when people have no choice, of course there is need for some short term private tenancies but for families they are just awful.

Council and housing association tenancies don't suck! I wish I had one of them (never gonna happen)

Inaccurate on a few points there toby