My tenant gave me just 8 days notice – help please

Hi Romain,

Just had a good read of Section 5 Housing Act 1988 and Schedule 1. Section 5(3) states:

"(3)The periodic tenancy referred to in subsection (2) above is one—
(a)taking effect in possession immediately on the coming to an end of the fixed term tenancy;

(b)deemed to have been granted by the person who was the landlord under the fixed term tenancy immediately before it came to an end to the person who was then the tenant under that tenancy;

(c)under which the premises which are let are the same dwelling-house as was let under the fixed term tenancy;

(d)under which the periods of the tenancy are the same as those for which rent was last payable under the fixed term tenancy; and

(e)under which, subject to the following provisions of this Part of this Act, the other terms are the same as those of the fixed term tenancy immediately before it came to an end, except that any term which makes provision for determination by the landlord or the tenant shall not have effect while the tenancy remains an assured tenancy"

Section 5(3) (e) seems to indicate that the terms of the Statutory Periodic are the same as the AST. And I cannot see any reference to 4 weeks notice.

I have looked at other forums and this question does seem open to debate. Do you know the part of the Act that states the 4 week notice period?

Reply to the comment left by "Gary Nock" at "25/02/2015 - 13:47":

Hi Gary,

This comes from the Protection from Eviction Act 1977.

Note also section 5(3)(e) that you quoted from the Housing Act and which states that clauses about termination ("determination") have no effect during a statutory periodic AST.

Reply to the comment left by "Romain " at "25/02/2015 - 14:44":

Hi Romain,

The Housing Act says:

"determination by the landlord or the tenant shall not have effect while the tenancy remains an assured tenancy"

When it goes to a Statutory Periodic it is no longer an AST. So the clause appears to apply which means that the Notice period as given in the original AST applies to the Statutory Periodic. But......

I have looked at the Protection From Eviction Act and think I have found the 4 weeks notice clause.

5 Validity of notices to quit.

(1)[No notice by a landlord or a tenant to quit any premises let (whether before or after the commencement of this Act) as a dwelling shall be valid unless—

(a)it is in writing and contains such information as may be prescribed, and

(b)it is given not less than 4 weeks before the date on which it is to take effect.

No notice by a licensor or a licensee to determine a periodic licence to occupy premises as a dwelling (whether the licence was granted before or after the passing of this Act) shall be valid unless—

(a)it is in writing and contains such information as may be prescribed, and

(b)it is given not less than 4 weeks before the date on which it is to take effect.

So this seems to settle it. 4 weeks notice it is on either side on a Statutory Periodic. And a word of warning I think to Landlords who accept verbal notices. If a tenant tells you they want to move out because they have split up, and then get back together and want to stay, then their notice is not valid unless it's in writing.

Had this happen to a landlord this week who rang me for advice. Now I can tell him exactly where the notice in writing bit comes from.

Thanks Romain.

Reply to the comment left by "Gary Nock" at "25/02/2015 - 15:55":

"When it goes to a Statutory Periodic it is no longer an AST. So the clause appears to apply which means that the Notice period as given in the original AST applies to the Statutory Periodic."

Not so: the statutory periodic tenancy is still an AST, it's a statutory periodic AST and it follows the initial AST, which was a fixed term AST.

Essentially, all residential tenancies where the tenant does not share the premises with the landlord and is an individual are assured (shorthold) tenancies.
Section 1 of the Act defines assured tenancies.

"4 weeks notice it is on either side on a Statutory Periodic."

Not that this is the minimum. If the tenancy is monthly periodic (most are) the notice period is still at least one period, i.e. one month.

Reply to the comment left by "Gary Nock" at "25/02/2015 - 15:55":

4 weeks notice it is on either side on a Statutory Periodic.

That statement suggests that you think that the Landlord can give 4 weeks notice.

That is not the case.
Section 5(1) of the 1988 Act explicitly states that notice to quit by the Landlord is of no effect.

The 2 months notice of S21 applies

If I have understood this discussion so far, there seems to be a lack of certainty as to whether there are statutory laws that prevail regardless of what the Tenancy Agreement says?
Since I am experiencing similar uncertainty regarding tenant notice to quit (as a tenant), can someone clarify - assuming it is possible to do so.
I found this: "The Tenant’s notice must be for a minimum of one complete tenancy period, and must expire on the last day or the first day of a tenancy period.
Shorter notice may be accepted by the landlord, but there is no legal obligation on the landlord to accept a shorter notice than is required by law."
This aspect of tenant notice not only needing to be at least one month but also having to expire on the last day of the rental period does not seem to have covered in this present discussion. It seems that if enforceable the tenant can end up having to give almost 2 months notice if they just miss the deadline?

Reply to the comment left by "Romain " at "25/02/2015 - 16:05":

Romain,

Please could you give the legal basis for "minimum of one rental period notice" for tenant?

And if you know it "ending on last day of a rental period" for tenant's notice?

I have done some searching, but am unable to find answers to these points

Reply to the comment left by "Michael Barnes" at "26/02/2015 - 10:33":

Hi Michael,

This is Common Law but I don't know the exact origin as it is quite old (19th century?).

Reply to the comment left by "Michael Barnes" at "25/02/2015 - 17:13":

Michael I am sufficiently experienced to know that two months notice is given by the landlord. My reference was to the terms contained within the Protection From Eviction Act which is over ridden by the Housing Act.

Michael,

Before statute became markedly involved in the regulation of property transaction in the 20th century the whole lot was governed by common law and case law.

Therefore agricultural tenancies tended to be quarterly with rents payable on quarter days, commercial tenancies with whatever the parties agreed and residential tenancies either for a term certain ( a number of weeks or months) or periodic weekly, monthly or quarterly until either side gave notice.

It was usual for a weekly or monthly tenancy to have a similar notice period to the rent or have a term in the agreement to vary that.

The terms of the AST are certain in that the court will always interpret the agreement to comply with the act regardless of what is or is not written in the agreement, provided the letting has the character of a tenancy ( residential, quiet enjoyment, etc) So you can include any terms or conditions you like in an AST but if they are not reasonable and compliant with the explicit or usual implied terms in an AST they are unenforceable.

In this case, though it seems to have worked out for the landlord in the end, the landlord needs to think carefully about holding an unwilling tenant to the exact notice terms. You may have the law behind you in contract terms but end up losing out because it would have been more sensible to be pragmatic and let a departing tenant go.