Should we have been given notice?

Reply to the comment left by Mandy Thomson at 18/09/2017 - 14:02
Mandy,
You may find this interesting:
http://www.landlordlawblog.co.uk/2012/02/29/what-happens-if-the-tenant-gives-notice-but-then-doesnt-leave/

Reply to the comment left by Romain Garcin at 18/09/2017 - 15:49
Thanks Romain, you beat me to it?

Reply to the comment left by Gary Nock at 18/09/2017 - 14:16
A fixed contractual term for a number of months as opposed to a statutory periodic monthly renewing tenancy.

Reply to the comment left by Gary Nock at 18/09/2017 - 14:16
That's what happened with us - it was 6 m fixed term then rolled into a periodic at the end of the 6 m.

The question was more related to whether or not the difference in the notice period should have been conveyed to us, as it effectively changed the terms of our tenancy agreement? In the same way that when a credit card changes it's T&C's, they wrote to you to highlight the changes.

Also, when I contacted the letting agent on an unrelated matter, just after we had our offer accepted, I told them out of courtesy that we had made the offer so would have to give our notice in due course. The person I spoke to told me that we had to give one months notice, which I said I was aware of. There was no mention of 1 month from the rent due date as it had become a periodic tenancy. The first I realised about this was when I called to ask if it was a calendar month or 4 weeks notice and I was told to check the tenancy agreement. I told her about my earlier conversation and she just effectively dismissed it and said that was wrong yet I had relied on that information.

Reply to the comment left by Paul Green at 18/09/2017 - 09:44
I'm not suggesting we are being singled out - the question relates to if we should have been told of the change of notice period when the type of tenancy changed, which everyone seems to be overlooking, hence the question is called 'Should we have been given notice?'. The rest of the info was to give some background rather than to invite comment.

I'm also not suggesting we should be allowed to pick and choose our leaving date just that I didn't realise the notice period was from the rent payment date as that wasn't specifically pointed out to us.

Diane, you wrote:
"I'm also not suggesting we should be allowed to pick and choose our leaving date just that I didn't realise the notice period was from the rent payment date as that wasn't specifically pointed out to us."

I'm sure all of that will be in your Tenancy Agreement and therefore it was not changed it was just that you maybe had not read it properly. My advice would be not to give notice until you have a fixed completion date. If that means you leave before the end of the Tenancy at least it allows you plenty of time to move your stuff out (Less pressure to find a removal company and easier on you on the day) and also as you say time to prepare the property you are leaving.

Diane I refer you to my comment from yesterday:

"And there is no obligation on the landlord or agent to notify you of the ending of the fixed term and commencement of a statutory periodic one"

This is normally covered in the original tenancy agreement in relation to any continuation and also in Section 5 of The Housing Act 1988. This link may help explain:

http://www.landlordlawblog.co.uk/2011/08/11/what-is-a-periodic-tenancy/

Reply to the comment left by Gary Nock at 19/09/2017 - 20:48
But we were notified that the fixed term was ending because we were given the option to renew it (for a fee) or to go onto the periodic tenancy (for free). As we had always intended to stay as long as it took to get enough deposit to buy, we didn't want to be tied in for another fixed period so didn't renew the fixed term. I just feel that the letting agent ought to have alerted us that the alternative notice period kicked in on the periodic tenancy.

Anyway, thank you everyone for your answers - I'm glad I'm not a landlord but I'm more glad I won't be a tenant much longer!

Reply to the comment left by Ray Davison at 18/09/2017 - 15:29Thanks Ray and Romain. I've had a good look over this and stand corrected; the tenant's notice does legally end the tenancy although of course the tenant still can't be removed except by bailiffs acting under a court order.
I visited the link Ray provided in his later post to Tessa Shepperson's Landlord Lawblog. In that she says that as the former tenant would now technically be a trespasser, she speculates about whether a possession claim for trespass, or the standard eviction claim should be used - I would be grateful if someone could please clarify as the residents would have a key; therefore, wouldn't they be licencees, not trespassers?
Also, in the comments section Adrian Thompson (who runs the Landlords Guild) states he's been able to get many landlords double rent under the Distress for Rent Act, which I was very surprised to learn as I didn't think many modern judges would entertain that; again, does anyone know of many of these double rent claims being granted (though I also gather many landlords unwittingly overturn their chances of getting this by treating the occupier as a tenant)?
In Diane's situation I would be concerned about this in case she should overstay her notice.

Reply to the comment left by Mandy Thomson at 20/09/2017 - 15:48
"although of course the tenant still can't be removed except by bailiffs acting under a court order."

This is actually not so clear-cut as, to my knowledge, no law requires it.