Prohibitive Covenant restricts occupancy

In my opinion the AST is still valid because it is a contract between you and the landlord. The fact that he has broken the restrictions has nothing to do with you he may now be forced to give you Notice but he must act within the law and cannot simply ask you to leave.

On the issue of the electricity bill you can only be charged for what you have used at the same rate at which the landlord is charged and a portion of any standing charges. Ask the landlord for a copy of the bill and how he has apportioned your share.

On the issue of Council tax it is normal for a tenant of a self contained home to pay the council tax bill - there should be mention of this in the AST, if there is not you can challenge the landlord but not the local authority - once the property is banded the tax is due and they will hold you responsible because you have exclusive use of the property.

Yes this is a mess and your landlord is obviously angry that you have made the local authorities aware of the fact that he is letting the property, this is not a reason to be rude to you and you should make him aware that you will take legal action if he persists

One thing is very obvious, you can no longer be happy living in this property with your family because your relationship with the landlord has broken down and since you live in close proximity you probably need to find somewhere else. If you do move out and the landlord tries to recover the cost of electricity from your deposit, without showing you the information above, you can raise a deposit dispute and let the arbiters decide. Good luck

Follow me on Twitter@landlordtweets

My book, where I warn about the storm clouds that are gathering for landlords is here >>> http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1484855337

Reply to the comment left by "Mary Latham" at "13/08/2013 - 10:30":

The problem is that the owner has broken planning law, and he has now been found out. This is not your problem but you should find out the views of the local planning department. They will determine what happens in respect of your tenancy. It would be good also to speak with citizens advice.

With all due respect to Mike, who has very kindly tried to be helpful in his post above, I know that planning will not be able to help this landlord and that Citizens Advice isn't the way to go either.

The advice given by Mary is spot on, as it should be as she was the first ever person to deliver Landlords Accreditation training in the UK, therefore making her the longest serving too as she's still delivering seminars now. Mary has also recently become a a best selling author so she bloody well better be right 😉
.
.

A complex one for you experts out there ? What arrogance.
I am no expert but I dont see whats so complex about this one.
If you dont like where you are, move. Simple. Except the guy is stuck with a cost forever - thanks to you. And you think he shouldnt be so unfriendly ?

If you had consulted your landlord in the first place, you might have worked out an acceptable solution for both of you with a bit of compromise. The fact that he is breaking whatever is not for you to deal with. What a bull in the china shop approach ! American or Israeli ?

** COMMENT ADDED BY MODERATOR - this post was reported for being racially inflammatory at 20:00 on 14/08/2013.

Comments which are deemed to be sexist, racist, sharing illegal or immoral strategies, contain extremist politics or which are generally considered to be offensive and reported by a large number of people will not be tolerated. In this instance we have decided to leave the comment due the the difficulty in moderation because others have commented on the comment and the issue appears to have been overcome. **

Hi Mary, wow what a horrible experience for you, I'm so sorry, obviously you have a difficult situation and it's not at all your fault. I bet your land lord is not declaring the income either!

I am a land lord, but the advice has been given, thank goodness you can hopefully secure your deposit. Regards the harassment, as you say you have the right to quiet enjoyment. If you get any more harassment contact 101. Although the police cannot sort out the civil matter if you have any bad behaviour you can contact them regards that, a course of conduct that causes u harassment alarm or distress (diarise it), should instigate some police attention. 3 occasions is listed under the Harassment Act, however if it needs to be one sided not an argument. Also u could try ur local council and see if u have a private rent ream, we have one hear, they are a team who work with local private landlords and local private tenants. They are not the housing team, they tend to deal with inspections and fair rent disagreements. You may find them helpful. Council tax is always applied to a seperate dwelling, for example I have a lodger in my farmhouse, her two rooms and private entrance would be subject to planning, and she therefore would be subject to council tax, however, she uses our part of the house to do her washing, this alone I was told saved me having to have planning and her having to pay council tax... So if u live entirely separately even on the same electricity bill it seems that you are subject to council tax due to the local authority. Personally I'd move out, claim ur deposit back and then bubble him up to everyone, especially planning and tax people! What a nightmare fore you, I wish u well in the future in this country 🙂

@ Mary Kane - interesting isn't it that all the advice that's been given here has come from landlords? Hardly the villans the press make us out to be hey?

By the way, you don't have to be a landlord to support The GOOD Landlords Campaign - See link below 🙂
.

It would have been so simple to contact the landlord at the outset (or his agent) as soon as you had the problem of installing a telephone and all of this could have been avoided and you would now have ‘peaceful enjoyment’ of the property and your telephone installed. It's almost certain one of the previous tenants must have had a 'phone.

You have become embroiled in an unnecessary battle created by your own failure to contact the person actually responsible for the property and services supplied to it - YOUR LANDLORD. Whatever he has or has not done with regard to registering the property is actually his problem, not yours and as I do everything by the book I genuinely have no sympathy with him but also have none with you because of the way you have gone about this. I suspect it clearly states in your contract that you are not allowed to change service suppliers or have anything installed upon the property without the landlord's written approval (not to be unreasonably withheld of course). This includes drilling of holes in the walls for a telephone. In one property I now have two cable phone entry points where a stupid tenant failed to contact me and allowed the phone people to drill through a "tanked" wall for the second one. This caused a serious ingress of water and now there is a damp problem which will take ages to dry out where one never existed before . I have to now accept a much lower rent from the next tenant while it dries out - would you want to pay full rent for a "damp" room????

Given the situation you have now created, the advice given by Mary Latham is correct but it would have been nice if she'd said the above too, so that you and any other tenants reading this article are under no doubt that they should not install, have holes drilled, knock down walls (just because they can), change or adjust anything in the property without the landlords specific written approval, after all, it is the landlord that owns the property and carries full liability for it, NOT the tenant.

R

Again I think all the commentators have concentrated on the landlord tenant issue and not the real issue. As I read the initial story - the landlord had a 'cottage' built within his main house grounds. He got planning permission to do so but there was a restrictive covenant - that it could only be used for family use? This covenant is crucial. I can speak from experience with a farming employment covenant. Break the covenant and you break planning law. The planners could if they wish tell you to demolish the building. In practice they rarely take these draconian powers. But now given that the landlord broke the law in renting out the property then the lease cannot legally exist. Unless there is a legal expert out there to say otherwise?

Hence my comment that the tenant needs to understand what the planning department will do.

The planners have in their power to accept the position and will usually extract some form of recompense. Now lets see there is all that past council tax etc ... Equally they are unlikely to make someone homeless... Also perhaps there was something in the covenant which wasn't as prescriptive ....and could be interpreted differently. Hence it is crucial to understand what the planners will do - contact the head of planning in the council - you have already accessed the files so they know all about it.

Now you can understand why the owner/landlord was angry. He knew he was breaking the law. Your innocent actions have caught him out. That is not your fault. What is your concern is what the authorities will now do. That will determine whether you can stay. Of course you may not wish to.

Then there is the issue of harassment. I think you need to report that to the police immediately. There intervention will prevent further incidents. Keep records. And explain the whole story to the police. They need to understand motives.

That brings me to another interesting point. If the landlord was not in planning law allowed to rent out his property, then the lease is illegal. And therefore you don't have to pay anything. That is why I said talk to citizens advice & a lawyer.

Mark I think you missed this point. The issue is whether the landlord broke planning law. If he did that issue has to be resolved. You need to know whether the lease is legal or not.

Oh and by the way I see this issue as identical to a landlord who breaks HMO law.

Sam... Yes I am an American and proud of it. You are suggesting that only American's or Israeli's want a deal that is 'on the up and up'? Or is that we are the only nationalities that would find this to be a complex matter? Arrogant and ignorant to boot right?
That kind of attitude does nothing to defray the belief (held by many) that private landlord's in the UK are a bunch of greedy, self serving, con men.
If you wish to run a legitimate business venture then you have to comply with the regulations...A business for profit...you reap the rewards...the cost is compliance with the law...
I as the 'customer' am entitled to a level of service...a level that has been sadly missing in my situation. Am I concerned that the landlord will now have an ongoing tax liability upon my exit? Absolutely not! I am supposed to feel sorrow, guilt? What I do feel is outrage and so should all the local citizens of the community. The local Council has been deprived of much needed revenue!
Sam... in his apparent wisdom would promote a 'side deal' with the Landlord which by my reckoning would result in being complicit in a tax evasion scheme!
I find it ethically and morally reprehensible that a person would shirk (evade..defraud..etc) his tax liability for 20 years!
I have no problem paying taxes on a property...I do have a problem with misrepresentation!
I entered into a contract that was restricted from being used for that purpose (unknown to me at the time) in addition it was NOT valued or banded as was a requirement for the past 20 years.
At the time I entered into that agreement there was no tax liability as the property did not exist. My contention is the status of the property at the exact time I entered into the agreement. The actions on the property are all retroactive, subsequent actions, to my signing of the contact.
Mary.... Respectfully, how is a contract based on a prohibited action enforceable? If I was privy to the status of the property perhaps I could reason the validity but the obvious misrepresentation and deceit make me question the illegality...I am not familiar with UK contract law and perhaps only upon clear enforcement action by planning would it be deemed an illegal contract?
Sam...being an "arrogant" American I do imagine this to be complex.
I hope in the future that subsequent posts denigrating particular nationalities are strongly discouraged...
On a final note I as an American do not always support the actions of the United States Government and will too speak out if my government is "Arrogant or Oppressive" Despite the bad rap we do believe in "We the People"
That being said this housing/tenancy forum is no place for snide comments or international political agenda.
Thanks for any constructive input.

The AST is safe for 6 months full stop. If you are forced to to go because of LL within that time you can sue him, eg for removal costs, lossess incurred. He is the one liable.

An AST can be used on any property even a business one, the fact that its in breach of planning law is not the point, that is between the planners and the LL.

If you have a valid AST you have rights for the first six months and after that it becomes a rolling periodic tenancy usually with 2 months notice being given by LL.

Planners take ages to do anything, but pay your council tax band A money as the council tax people are quick on that stuff!

Do not worry about what the planners will do, that's not ur headache, it's ur LL and serve him right!

I checked this with my solicitor just now when he rang up for advice on poultry! Lol not that I'm an expert on hens but he is on contracts!