Am I entitled to a refund

Hi Zozo

That seems like sharp practice to me but what we don't know is whether your landlord is being greedy or going back on his word or whether the agent has made a mistake or is trying to pull a fast one and pocket the extra £430.

You have already identified your own mistake by pointing out that you didn't get the terms of the offer to leave early clarified in writing.

You could, of course, just say that you understand their position and that you will now be retaining possession of the property until 25th August and taking your time to complete your move. Play it cool, if your landlord really wants/needs vacant possession on the 18th he will soon come back to you to renegotiate. If he does, then you will have the upper hand at that point. You could just agree to accept the £430 but you could also push your luck a bit by saying that you've changed your arrangements now and if they want you to change them back again this will cost you money. On that basis you might be able to negotiate a slightly better deal for yourself. On the other hand, it could backfire on you as it has for the landlord/agent.

"Play by the sword, die by the sword".

Oh, decisions, decisions!

Please let me know what you decide to do and how you get on.

Very good advice above.

If you pay the rent you are entitled to possession so I'd at least leave some furniture in your old home until the last moment.

Taking possession before a tenancy ends can be a very costly exercise for a landlord.

You say that it was agreed that "the LL would be happy for me to vacate the property on the 18th of August", but you don't say that it was agreed that you would not have to pay for period after. If that is the case, then I don't think you have any grounds for disputing this.

That doesn't mean that the LL isn't being awkward. Generally if a LL takes possession earlier, it just means that he can do the next let or sale earlier (other things being equal) - so there is no loss to the LL.

I would definitely make it clear that if the LL expects you to pay to the end of the notice period, that you won't give up possession before then. and point out that the earlier he can get possession the more likely he is to sell early. I suspect that if s/he chooses to delay, the sales market turnover will decline during that time.

For tenancies made after 1 October 2015, s35 of the Deregulation Act 2015 amends s21 of the Housing Act 1988 to allow the 2 months' notice to end on any day (after the end of a fixed term), not just the end of a rental period. s40 then adds a new section which requires the landlord to repay any rent applying during that final period, but after the tenant moves out.

Reply to the comment left by Frank Laurent at 08/08/2017 - 16:27Well remembered, Frank. Zozo...you need to look into this.

Reply to the comment left by Frank Laurent at <a href="08/08/2017" rel="nofollow">https://www.property118.com/am-i-entitled-to-a-refund/#comment-93409">08/08/2017 - 16:27Thanks for pointing this out, but I would question your interpretation.
The first condition is:
"(a) as a result of the service of a notice under section 21 the tenancy is brought to an end before the end of a period of the tenancy,"
My understanding of the text is that if the end of the s21 2-month notice period ends before the rental period end date, then the tenant doesn't have to pay for those extra days between when the S21 notice period ends and the rental period ends.
I think Zozo is talking about leaving BEFORE the S21 notice period ends, so a refund is at the LL's discretion. The S40 wording is poor and ambiguous, but that's what it says to me.

Reply to the comment left by John Frith at 09/08/2017 - 15:14I concur

WTF
I don't know how other Landlords to this site feel, there are plenty of places for tenants to get advise, what ever the circumstances if this site wants to represent landlords as the name Landlords Union suggests then don't play both sides.

Reply to the comment left by Chris Baker at 12/08/2017 - 09:45We prefer to believe there should be so "sides"

If a landlord is out of line that can and does sadly earn other landlords a bad reputation.

I want all landlords to be good landlords just as much as tenants do.

Hi Mark, you have built up a good reputation in favour of landlords.
There are many sites for tenants, there is nothing balanced about the rules between landlords and tenants. I for one will not take the same interest in your site if you cater for tenants giving information against landlords for any reason.
To be clear I do not condone rouge Landlords or the bad treatment of any tenants.
My point is you now go under the badge of Landlords Union. I can see how from a business point you would like to get tenants on board, if that's the way you wish to proceed I wish you the very best.
I am sincerely greatful for the efforts that you and your partners put into this site. Please forgive me for being sore, but with section 24 and every thing else going on against landlords your site was to some extent on side to find a way forward through many of the attribute that effect many landlords.

I believe the bottom line is, it should not be about balance on your site as you state; it should be 100% for Landlords, I think you need to choose; are you a claiming to be a Landlord Union a Tenants Union or a landlord and Tenants Union? personally there is only one of these that work for me.
I am letting you know my thoughts, Maybe other think the same? Maybe you stand to lose what you've built up?
Maybe you stand to gain?
Maybe I just woke up grumpy? (that's nothing new just lately)

Best regards
kris