Carryon Regardless Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 Last year I served a notice, outside of the fixed term, all the prescribed information of L and T and property are in place. also the prescribed info that explains all, you know "must be 2 clear months, seek advice from.." is clearly printed. Now I made a silly blunder as in, "I ----------------------------- (Landlord) Give you notice that I require possession of the dwelling-house known as: ---------------------------- ----------------------------- After the expiry of this notice. Or the last day of a period of the tenancy next occurring following expiry of this notice. This notice expires AFTER: July 31st 2011. Notice creation date: 23rd June 2011." Shelter have written (some time ago) to tell me that the notice is not valid and I can see why. Without my thoughts (yet), and other than serve another to be sure what do you guys think ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LLAW96 Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 I would say forget it, particularly as shelter is on the case. Google Lower Street Properties ltd -v- Jones (1996) 28 HLR 877 CA and Elias -v- Spencer [2010] EWCA Civ 246 re the lack of clarity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carryon Regardless Posted January 20, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 Thanks for the links, unfortunately so far I've failed to bring anything up. I'll look again later. Is it your opinion that my saving clause doesn't serve purpose, or that a saving clause is without value ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest theartfullodger Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 Indeed, if Shelter say it's invalid you can be fairly certain it will be: They are the experts, and many home-owners, street homeless, tenants, lodgers, mortgage-holders, mobile-home residents, etc etc etc have cause to be grateful for their help & advice. Did they say why?? (Wording, dates, ..??). Sounds like you've got the dates very very very wrong! Issue a new one, make sure it's right... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carryon Regardless Posted January 20, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 Well I'm not so sure Shelter are all experts. They often refer to their Solicitor for confirmation, here I'm fairly certain they haven't. My history with them gives me cause to doubt their expertise and their ethics. My view is that the notice is valid. The purpose of a saving clause is to give a judge opportunity to state his chosen correct expiry date where one is stated wrongly, actually not like like this as the notice states that expiry is "after" so the statement is correct. I am well aware the a LL goes into court on the back foot, and here my mistake is clear The notice and saving clause aren't ambiguous, in my opinion. I have interest to see where I'm wrong with my opinion, this could be of interest then more than I. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest theartfullodger Posted January 21, 2012 Report Share Posted January 21, 2012 'sonly Judge can finally decide if you are right or wrong, as we all know,, and Judges can come up with surprising decisions (variously in favour of T's and LL's , depending on which way the wind is blowing as far as I can tell....). I've been to court convinced my view was correct to find the Bench telling me otherwise.. as I guess many LLs have been..... What was the start date of original fixed term & what does it say was end date ?? (eg if is said 01/01/09, end 01/01/10, or "for a period of 52 weeks" then think your notice would be invalid...). Case law seems "interesting". - different precedents & others eg. - Lower Street Properties v Jones 1996, Notting Hill Housing Trust v Roomus 2006, Dovetail Estates Ltd v Mazrekaj January 2006, Clerkenwell County Court "Claim issued prematurely; saving clause was not effective.."... etc etc etc etc... Given Shelter employs many Solicitors of it's own, then I think banking on their not having been involved may be risky but clearly your shout.. If you want some of their expertise subscribe to Shelter Legal, probably the best in-depth site for such matters... http://england.shelter.org.uk/legal However, in your shoes I'd still issue another S21 just-in-case... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carryon Regardless Posted January 21, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2012 Ok I've read some of the information and opinion from the links. The 'Lower Street' case enjoyed sucess as the wording allowed for the correct date to be calculated by the T. In mine it states "This notice expires AFTER: July 31st 2011." July 31st is incorrect but 'after' is correct. Then the saving clause above "After the expiry of this notice. Or the last day of a period of the tenancy next occurring following expiry of this notice." The next period of tenancy would have ended on August 31st 2011 and would be correct for the minimum 2 months notice period, so in my view the saving clause complies with the requirement as the notice does expire after July 31st on the 31st August. Then we have the prescribed wording below that informs the T of the required notice period, enabling them to calculate the correct date. I believe anyone can say these notices are confusing because they are, but it is what is prescribed to us to work with and I see no simple format for them to be drafted. Many T will be lost with the wording, as will many LL's. I don't see the defence that the T finds it too confusing could ever be a valid defence as there is no simple way. Shelter "I have a copy of the notice served and have advised Mrs ...... the notice does not provide 2 months notice as required by Section 21 of the Housing Act 1988 and cannot be relied upon after the 31st July." My opinion is different which is why I am asking you good folk to show why I'm wrong. What is it that does not give the 2 months notice period. Yesterday I hand delivered a new notice. Today I posted, recorded despatch (no signature required), the same. Often this is when the games start, and the T have 2 months + to play them. I'm in no rush to repossess but if the lady now refuses to pay rents, causes other abuse, successful use of the 1st notice that has already demonstrated my desire can reduce my losses. Gaining a court date will give her time advantage, and then to convince a judge that repossession in 14 days is warranted is a challenge. As with other LL's I would take pleasure in reminding Shelter that defending T's regardless is sometimes just plain wrong and we the LL's don't continually deserve to finance abusive T's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richlist Posted January 21, 2012 Report Share Posted January 21, 2012 I agree with CoR. Based on logic the notice makes sense because it expires AFTER. However, I am aware that the law and judges don't always follow logic or common sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LLAW96 Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 I still think you are are on dodgy ground; Your notice must give at least two months notice, although no actual date need be specified it must have sufficient clarity in order for a tenant to know or easily ascertain the date referred to. Your notice has an element of ambiguity. If the tenancy is a periodic tenancy as here the date specified in the notice must be the last day in a period of the tenancy, I have noted your rider clause but again it is ambiguous and open to interpretation for instance if your rider clause stated; "alternatively at the end of the period of your tenancy which will end next after the expiration of two months from the service upon you of this notice" I do not think you would be in any difficulty despite the incorrect expiry date. Finally you did your notice refer to section 21(4) as if it did not it would be invalid. Do you really want to risk fighting a case against a tenant who probably qualifies for legal aid, if you do convince a judge are you prepared to face the consequences of a possible appeal. In any event given the time that has expired since you issued your original notice you could have issued a further notice and now be beyound reproach. My analysis is that you have though long and hard over this but at the end of the day it's your call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.