Can the landlord force me to stay?

[milkytwilight]

Hi, I know this is in property/DIY but my phone doesn't let me choose any other topic. I will ask that this gets moved to Legal.

I am in an AST ending September. If I want to give notice I need to do that in July. All fine, all understood.

There is a clause in my tenancy that says I can't leave the property empty for more than 28 days.

We are buying a house and surprisingly the searches have all come back after 3 working days, having originally been told they are expecting them back at the end of July.

We have asked the landlord to allow us to break our lease and continue paying rent, CT and utilities until they find a new tenant and also to cover the cost of the new tenancy agreement for the letting agent. Landlord has said no, fair enough, that's their right. But also stated they expect us to stay in the property until September because of the 28 day clause in our tenancy agreement.

We don't want to lose this house purchase, we are now looking at completing early July. We have absolutely no issue paying everything up to the end of September but we would want to move into our new house, therefore leaving the property vacant.

Can we continue to pay our rent, CT and utilities but move out before the tenancy agreement is up? Is there a legal basis for the clause about not letting the property be empty? Will we have repercussions?

Thank you.

What's he gonna do if you break the lease? Evict you? Therefore it doesn't really matter. Also you can just pop back to the house every so often therefor it's not empty for 28 continuous days

If it's a clause and you signed the contract and the landlord has told you you need to stay because of the clause... surely you have to stay?

You'll just have to move into your new place when there's 27 days to go on your rented place.

We bought and had 3 months still in our rented place before we moved. You'll be paying anyway, why not just move later?

Can one of you not spend say one night a week in the old place until September? It's only a couple of weeks really.

How far away are you moving?

You don't have to move into the new house on completion, in fact it can be a real bonus to have some time to do any works, decorate, move over more slowly without the rush and stress.

Visit the property once every 28 days. It’s usually an insurance requirement. You don’t need to stay, but you need to check that it’s all in order, and that the pipes aren’t frozen etc.

It’ll be a consequence of their insurance.

What's he going to do if you don't??

We've moved this thread over to our Legal Matters topic for the OP. Thanks to everyone who's responded so far.

Some home insurance policies need the house occupied for certain coverages to apply.

If you're going to be paying it anyway, take the 3 months to slowly move over and get the new house looking how you want and do the final move out with under 28 says. Really it's just 2 months so totally doable

Why doesn't he just get a new tenant in early?
Then he'd be getting paid twice.

It’s a clause - it’s not a legal requirement I believe. It’s the same as having a clause stating you have to dress like a clown one day a month. Would you? What will he do? Evict you?

Move, but go back every 27 days.

It’ll be due to insurance. Just stay at the old place once in a while.

A few options -
Move to your new property and just go back for 1 night every4 weeks to the rental using an air mattress.

Stay in rental but use it as an opportunity to deep clean and decorate the property you are buying? Decorating even if just a lock of paint is so much easier in an empty house.

Could you use the time to reduce your removal costs I.e take more of it over yourself in cars?

I would probably do a mixture of both. Decorated and clean empty house. Trust me you will find things which you need to do. Then move in, potentially have to do one night or so at the rental.

Also I know you said your purchase was progressing quickly but is the rest of the chain ready? Ypuay find although you are ready, your sellers onwards chain takes a bit longer

It will be because of insurance.

re those people saying what will he do - worst case scenario is something happens to the property and then insurance wont cover it because it wasn't inhabited and he'd sue you.

So it's not something that I would ignore and risk

@ALoanAndConfused

Move, but go back every 27 days.

Yup, that’s what I would do too.

Are you moving far away, OP?

Just wondering if you could actually use this as an opportunity to move in slowly, do a deep clean, get decorated etc without having to work around furniture; then you can move your stuff over. Once you’ve done that just pop in to your old place a couple of times over the course of the remaining 8-10 weeks to check everything is in order.

Hi all

Thanks.
As someone else has mentioned they can put what they want in a tenancy agreement, doesn't make it legal. I'm wanting to know if this is the same.

This was why I wanted to know the actual legal position if possible.

We're moving for personal reasons, a relative requires a lot of care and has gone downhill very quickly the last 6 months. We are moving about an hour away, so when we complete we will be living in the new house, rather than staying in the rented property to provide that care.

I may tell the landlord we will visit the property once a month and see what they say.

To a pp, it is illegal for a landlord to collection rent from two people for the same period in their property, so they couldn't rent it out and get twice the money. However we did offer to pay until they found someone else and cover the letting agent fees for reletting.

When do you plan to exchange? Why can’t this landlord try and find new tenants once you exchange?
Our tenancy agreement had a clause in it to say the landlord can accept earlier notice and tenants only pay until earlier of new tenants starting and original end date. I just let my tenants go early, never charged them and the place was filled quickly anyway.

The house we've bought is only two years old so no decorating needing thankfully.
Between work, school, nursery and the new caring responsibilities I'll go back one a month but that's it.
I just wondered if there was a legal basis for it

The issue is that you signed the tenancy containing the clause that the home will not be left empty for more than 28 days.

You can leave but if something happens when you leave it empty for six weeks - like squatters moving in or a fire or something - and the insurance won't pay out because the place was empty, you could be partially or wholly liable for the repairs.

Much easier to spend one night in 27 there to protect yourself.

Thanks everyone.
The landlord wants us to stay living there properly, I said we'd pop back one a month so it isn't empty 28 days, but they're expecting us to "stay." I'm guessing there's nothing they can do with this.

Like I said, we offered to pay until they found someone new plus any fees to do a new agreement for new tenants so we've tried to be fair, but with the relative we really do need to be close to offer daily care.
We are due to exchange potentially next week with a completion date still being discussed between end of June and first week of July.

There is no "rest of chain." Us and our vendors who are moving into rented.

They can’t force you to stay, but that wont mean you’re not liable for the rent until the end of the AST term.

They wont know if you only go back for the day or not. They'd only find out by going into the property without your permission which is also a breach of the agreement.

You owe the LL rent until the agreed expiration/notice date of the tenancy.

The " limited length empty" clause is usually set by building insurers. Your LL is the client of his property's building insurance.

If you leave earlier than your notice period, you formally notify him you've left the property vacant. It's then his business to make sure his vacant property complies with his insurers occupation requirement. Not your problem.