Commercials lease outside LL tenant act 1954.

[TheHouseonHauntedHill]

If a commercial lease is outside the ll tenant act of 1954, but excludes section 24/28
.

Is there any point being outside the act? I thought the point of the act was to protect LL right to rent the property elsewhere?

But if 24 to 28 is excluded then that means the tenant has the automatic right to renew?

You have that the wrong way around.

LTA 1954 gives tenants an automatic right to renew.

If you exclude s24-28 of the act, the tenant no longer has an automatic right to renew.

Thanks.

So am I completely wrong in my understanding.

Being inside the LL Tennant act gives the tenant a lot of protection.

The landlord looses some rights over their property.

Being outside the act tips rights in favour of the landlord, including the right to choose a new tenant at the end.

Is the act itself 24 to 28 or is that a specific clause within it?

I thought the whole point of being outside the act gave a LL more protection than with a weak covenant than being within it?

Sections 24 to 28 of the act are the ones that give tenants security of tenure (ie a right to renew the lease and stay in occupation). The act includes a lot of other things.

if the lease is outside the act, the landlord has more freedom to decide what to do when the original lease ends.

im not sure what you’re asking about when you mention a weak covenant?

Thanks gorilla.

I'm confused because I instructed an original solicitor to put us outside the act.

However on renewal of the lease apparently that specific section was left out!

That to me was the whole point of being outside the act.
Why would any solicitor leave that out when I have specifically asked to be outside the act.

I'm confused and flummoxed.

Now we are coming to renew the tenant is upset because that section is on the renewal.

She wants security of tenure.

So you are landlord and granted a lease which did not have security of tenure.

But you then agreed to renew that lease. And that renewal lease did have security of tenure?

Have I got that right? If so then your tenant does have security of tenure and is entitled to renew their lease.

You may have a claim against the lawyer who did the renewal lease for you.

Yes that's correct..
I asked for the original lease to be outside the act. No specifics,just outside the act.

The lease is up for renewal and I was hoping to be outside the act again, the solicitor was doing a lease extension. At the last minute Tennant solicitor said "hang on your changing the goal post's, you have done the section,this was not in the original lease" etc. ..

So I am confused! .
I'm happy for the tenant to continue but my predictiament is that I've been paying for stuff technically I shouldn't have been.

She thinks it's like a housing lease and I'm not sure how to get her to understand it's not.

Before I thought it was more casual legally but if I'm k. A situation where I'm trapped with her then she needs to start to understand her responsibilities....that's the problem.