Tenants in situ – Previous landlord does not have Gas/Electric/DPS?

Reply to the comment left by Maz at 25/02/2023 - 15:07
No, it would not be starting afresh. You will still be denied the s21 because of the lack of gas safety certificate.

The only way you can do this is if the tenant moved all his story into storage and moved into a hotel for a week or so

Pretending won't work, because x years down the line your tenant may stop pretending.

Of course you can take the view s,21 will be gone soon.... This is still a high risk strategy. Ask yourself the question can you manage for a year or so without rent. If not... Well you can work that out

Maybe he is a great tenant, it's up to you

Reply to the comment left by Maz at 25/02/2023 - 15:13
Doesn't matter. It helps if it's documented but the gas safety certificate is the problem

I would still continue if the financial side of it stacks up. Ive bought several properties with tenants in situ. Just make sure all the paperwork is in place. If the seller wants to sell, he'll make sure to get all the paperwork sorted. Its not rocket science. If the money the tenants are paying is market rate, ask them to sign a new tenancy agreement with the current landlord and then have it assigned to you. They can then sign a new Deposit Certificate. Its illegal to rent without a gas certificate and an electrical certificate is required every 5 years. I would continue but ask that all the paperwork is up to date. If he won't then walk away

Reply to the comment left by Mike Thomas at 25/02/2023 - 11:05
The leading case where no gas safety certificate existed at the time of letting is Byrne v Harwood-Delgado 2022.

Reply to the comment left by Kate Mellor at 23/02/2023 - 13:42
A landlord has 21 days from receiving a deposit to registering it with DPS or whoever they use. I was told this recently from my solicitor as the council wouldn’t accept the s21 and the deposit had to be paid back immediately to the tenant. I was acting for a landlord. They also needed a gas cert, electric cert, epc, ast, right to rent check before the section 21 could be re served. Good luck with this

With respect to Seething Landlord, the case of Byrne v Harwood-Delgado, heard at the County Court at Luton on 21 June 2022, is not the leading case.

It confirms the position of the Court of Appeal decision in Trecarrell House Ltd v Rouncefield [2020] EWCA Civ 760. In particular, if there is a valid GSC at the beginning of the tenancy but because of an administrative error, the GSC is not served, this error can be rectified by serving the GSC at a later date.

The Bynre v Harwood-Delgardo case deals with the position where there was no valid GSC at the beginning of the tenancy. In this scenario, it finds that this deficiency CANNOT be rectified. The decision is persuasive upon other County Courts, but is not binding.

The issue will only be finally determined
if this case is appealed to the Court of Appeal, or another case goes to the Court of Appeal.

Reply to the comment left by Mike Thomas at 26/02/2023 - 11:49
I think Seething Landlord did state that in an earlier comment if I recall correctly. I suspect the reference meant that it was the best case to date, which could well guide future decisions in the county court until such time, as you point out, that it goes higher.
The argument here rests on the fact that the seller didn’t have a gsc on commencement of the tenancy, rather than just failed to serve it.

You’re welcome, Maz.

As you continue with your endeavours to become a landlord consider joining iHowz Landlord Association - https://ihowz.uk/

A useful resource, providing comprehensive information on your responsibilities as a landlord, together with an excellent Landlord Advice Line.

Reply to the comment left by Mike Thomas at 26/02/2023 - 11:49
Trecarrel is not the leading case in this scenario, the question of what happens if there is no gas safety certificate in place at the commencement of the tenancy was not an issue in the case.

You are correct in saying that Byrne is of only persuasive authority but it is nevertheless the leading case and will remain so until challenged or superseded by another. Have you detected any flaw in the judgement that would in your opinion justify an appeal?

Reply to the comment left by Mike Thomas at 26/02/2023 - 11:49
Byrne wasn't really anything, it was just a reading of the law in the ordinary natural meaning. The GSC legislation is differently worded to the EPC legislation.

This was no accident.