Ellieben

[Ellieben]

My letting agents issued correctly a section 21 to one of my tenants.  The tenant was given two months notice. She found a property within a month which is ok by me but she is now wanting reimbursement of her removal costs and fees incurred by her new letting agent if I rent the property out again.  I understood that no reason had to be given when issuing a section 21.  I have posted about this particular tenant before requesting me to name persons which she referred to as au pairs before and Mortitia was correct in her assumption that these were not au pairs !   She told the letting agents that she has taken legal advice on recouping her removal costs.   Any advice would be appreciated.

[Richlist]

I think there may be some confusion on both the part of landlord &/or tenant in this case.

1. My understanding is that a landlord cannot receive double rent. That means if the outgoing tenant has paid rent up to a future date and then moves out, the landlord cannot move another tenant into the property and receieve another rent payment for that same period.

2. Provided notice has been correctly served and all the many legal requirements have been met by the landlord, the tenant is not entitled to receive any payment other than deposit refund and overpaid rent.

 

[bil8999]

That's also my understanding of the above

[Carryon Regardless]

It's a bluff,

No one in their right mind would 'pay' for legal advice that she says she has had.

Any deposit won't be in your hands, unless you opted for the insurance option. True you can't take 2 rents for the same period.

I am assuming you are repossessing due to losses, that being the case keep any monies you have and offset them against those losses. The ball is then in the abusers court to take action for recovery, of course you can defend the action. Additional costs for County Court would only be in the couple of hundreds anyway so even if you did lose it may be worth chancing a defence, if it got that far.

[Richlist]

Send her a Christmas card.

It's the season of goodwill.

[Ellieben]

Thank you all. My gut feeling is that she is bluffing too but letting agents seem to think she might have a go. Letting agents instigated the issue of section 21 as tenant had had a number of people staying at the house, all of whom foreigners and she asked yet again for another person to be included on her Tenancy agreement. I have been told by the agents that they will not advertise the property for a month or so as they seem to think that that will be the point where she will instigate her reimbursement of costs. As the property needs redecoration I am happy to do so but it will have to go on the market once this is done.  The deposit has been returned to her and I only received her final months rental so she is not owed any monies.   

Thank you again for replying. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Carryon Regardless]

Your LA is silly, the ex T has no claim so you getting on with your business is no concern of hers.

I would advertise and have the next T lined up, with more time to choose you have more chance of getting better.

[Melboy]

If your LA is thinking along the same lines as your tenant then they want sacking as well.

You have no obligation to pay any removal costs whatsoever.  You have applied the legal side of obtaining your property back correctly.

It is true you cannot receive "double rent" but that is a separate issue which you have not entered into so cannot apply here.

[Grampa]

The line your agent is taking either suggests they are inexperienced as agents or they are flavoring the tenant over their client (you).

I agree totally with the above comments.