Tennant will not pay increase in rent

[Madrads]

Last August the lease for my house ran out. This was a house we use to live in but now live in a work related house.The Tennants were asked to renew the lease or move out in July They said that they cannot afford the new rent but that they will only be in the house until November so I let them stay on with no lease. 12 months later they are still there, paying the old rent and they still don't want to sign a new lease and they are still moving out. I have been told by the end of October. What should I do ? There is someone ready to buy the house but they want it vacant

1. say they move out now and rent again for market value. Rent was set in 2005. With new lease.
2. if they refuse where do I stand? We now have no lease but they still pay the old rent.
3. can I change the locks.

Any property lawyers out there? Help.

Serve them notice obviously.

Which part of the U.K. are you in?

Assuming you're in England or Wales details here: www.gov.uk/evicting-tenants/section-21-and-section-8-notices

You can also try RLA.

The house is in Walthamstow, london

They have a statutory periodic tenancy and I am sorry, but you sound as though you need to do your homework. If you want the tenants to leave, you must serve them notice. Do note that the notice you serve will only be notice to start eviction proceedings if they don't move out.

You need to serve notice at the end of the lease. You cannot just change locks

I think you mean a tenancy agreement rather than a lease. They don't actually run out. It may reach the end of a minimum term, but it then becomes a periodic tenancy. This means you can't just change the locks, you need to give them proper notice as they are still your tenants.

Did you ever give them an Assured Shorthold Tenancy contract when they first moved in? If so, then you will have to give them notice as stated there, probably 2 months, called a s21 notice. The contract doesn't expire so would still be valid.

Or is there no written contract other than their payments?

It was all done aboveboard. We had a long return lease that ran from August 2005 to end Augst 2015. At the end they had a choice to leave or renegotiate the lease. They did mother but ask to stay for a further 3 months. Against the advice of my solicitor I said ok but since then it had dragged on.

I think the exact wording of our contract now is a rolling tenancy agreement.

If it's now a rolling tenancy agreement then you need to serve them notice. They won't go until you do.

Yes you need to serve a 2 months notice on a rolling contract

OP. As others have said you need to do your homework. In August 2015, the tenancy didn't end legally (even though you seem to think it did). If you want them to move out, you have to give them at least 2 months notice (it's called a Section 21 notice).

Be careful - a long lease is a different beast to an Assured Shorthold Tenancy. It may have defaulted to an AST on expiry, but it may just be rolling on on the same terms. Either way you need to give notice but if it's not AST it won't be a s21.

www.lease-advice.org/advice-guide/security-of-tenure-when-the-lease-runs-out/

get on with that section 21. Make sure you get it absolutely right or the next stage (court) will fail.

the section 21 is two months notice of court proceedings. If they don't go then, you need to go to court (costs and about 8 weeks to the hearing). If they protest they can extend that further by another six weeks, assuming your paperwork is right. If they still don't go, you need bailiffs, more costs and with court bailiffs, another long wait.

don't even think of changing locks or other harrassment. YOU will be the one in trouble.

Thanks all, spent the morning looking through papers and taking to solicitors. Luckily it had defaulted to an AST. We can serve the section 21. It is just such a pain after I feel I have been so generously

I don't think your terminology is correct which means you risk not serving the s21 notice correctly. If the tenants are there under the same terms as the original tenancy agreement without signing a new one, it is not an AST; it is a statutory periodic tenancy by definition.

'So generous' - it has suited you to take their rent payments all this time rather than evict them sooner. Let's face it, a one month void can wipe out an entire year's rent increase. If the tenants are a known quantity: pay on time and look after the place it is sensible to let the tenancy continue. You aren't doing them a huge favour.

Gosh they sound a real nusiance. fancy staying and cotinuing to pay rent as per the legal arrangement!

Im sorry, but you sound as if you have been very amateur (and lucky theyve paid you) - you need to stop messing them and your buyer around so you can all plan for the future. In your position and unusual lease type Id ask a specialist like Landlord Action to make sure the correct notice is served and the tenants do leave.

So generous

Yes, ten years with no rent increase and ten years worth of security is pretty fucking generous in the current rental market. It would be nice were it the norm - I'm in favour of much greater regulation - but it's not.

House prices have risen 60% in Walthamstow in that period, annual rent rise across London runs at about 4% a year over the last decade. OP has had certainty of tenancy; it has come at a cost.

We would love a 2005 level of rent!

I am an amateur, I am not a landlord, I rented the house to a friend of s friend. They had committment to the area and I know that I would be travelling for work and we decided to settle in another part of the country. I had offered them to buy in 2009, 2012 and last year. The main earner can afford it but he does not buy into home ownership ( he is not English). My lack of experience has landed me in this current situation. I know now I should not have let them stayed when the tenancy finished last year. I feel they want to stay and pay the same rent. I feel I now have to go through more expensive just to get the house back. Wowfudge is right I have not had to worry about the property for years but they have also had my word that they will not be moving and plenty of time to plan.

I'm afraid that you have to stop being an amateur, and yes, you do have to go through expenses to get the house back. Issue the section 21 and make sure every detail is right.

if they wont go: court fee for possession order £355. You can fill the form in online although you have to print it and send 3 copies plus supporting documents. Legal fees to get help are around £600. You can only claim £70 of that back from the tenant.

if still no vacate, bailiffs £127. (just gone up again). Could be a several month wait, the high court lot are quicker but cost about £900.

You are a landlord, and have been for 10 years. It's a simple letter to formally give them notice, and most likely they will then move out by the deadline. You don't actually have a problem yet so I don't understand why you think you are being hard done by!

Amateurs have no business being landlords. It is not hard to educate yourself and act in a professional and legal manner.

Don't' want to do it properly, then sell the house.

when you take money as rent you have responsibilities - whether they pay you peanuts and whether theyre a friend or not. You cant just decide to call yourself an amateur and say they dont apply to you - its their lives potentially your risking. You could end up beign fined thousands or even go to jail for breach of these rules. Dont suppose paying tax suited you either.

Be very careful what you do next, if you have not acted legally gas safety protected deposits) then you can not evict them anyway.

Its no wonder that lls have such a bad reputation and so many nanny laws are introduced when people deliberately ignore the laws