Protected tenancy

Rob7Lee said:

You've very little chance of getting him out, it sounds like it's going to be a money drain i'm afraid, only a cash buyer will buy it and by the sounds of the condition I think you are likely to get sub 50% of market value.

You need to decide whether you are in effect prepared to invest in it over potentially the next 25 years on a net basis, if not just sell it now.

Rob7Lee said:

Talal said:

Rob7Lee said:

You've very little chance of getting him out, it sounds like it's going to be a money drain i'm afraid, only a cash buyer will buy it and by the sounds of the condition I think you are likely to get sub 50% of market value.

You need to decide whether you are in effect prepared to invest in it over potentially the next 25 years on a net basis, if not just sell it now.

Having thought about it more I don't think I'll be going down the trying to evict him route, as you say it'll more than likely be a losing battle.

Fortunately I have someone that I trust and that is more clued up about property than me who is going to go down there with me and evaluate things. 

Sounds wise, just be prepared that you'll likely make a loss on the property until you get it back, i've offered on a few and you do get some who really treat the property as their own. As long as he keeps paying the rent you'll likey need to throw some money at it, or you throw some money at him but it'd likely need to be a considerable sum. Out of interest what would be the market rent if done up and non protected tenant?

Oggy Red said:

johnny73 said:

I'm sure you've looked into the legal side of this but a quick Google suggests that a protected tenancy only applies to the husband / wife / partner of the original tenant. I guess this might have been reset if the original tenant is defined as the person in residence when you inherited the property but worth seeking legal advise over.

The present tenant may have lived there and paid rent for a long enough period already, which would protect him in his own right.

Addickted said:

Talal said:

johnny73 said:

I'm sure you've looked into the legal side of this but a quick Google suggests that a protected tenancy only applies to the husband / wife / partner of the original tenant. I guess this might have been reset if the original tenant is defined as the person in residence when you inherited the property but worth seeking legal advise over.

Thank you johnny, was sure I read that it passed on to a child if living with them for a certain period of time but I could be mistaken.

Looking at the rent act 1977 it states -
Where paragraph 2 above does not apply, but a person who was a member of the original tenant’s family was residing with him [F4in the dwelling-house] at the time of and for the [F5period of 2 years] immediately before his death then, after his death, that person or if there is more than one such person such one of them as may be decided by agreement, or in default of agreement by the county court, shall be [F6entitled to an assured tenancy of the dwelling-house by succession].

This wording was present in the 1991 version, need to find out for certain when he took over the property but I'm sure it wasn't before then. If so it does suggest he should only be on an assured tenancy, but in that case why would the rent officer even be involved? Annoyingly the managing agent I speak with is off next week but definitely need to look into this further. 

If that's the case, then the succession changes the tenancy from 'protected' to 'assured', which means you are in a much better position to a) increase to market rent and b) be stricter with the tenants liability over the property.

I assume they succeeded the tenancy after the introduction of the 1988 Housing Act?

Forget the managing agent and go directly to an experienced property lawyer.

Big_Bad_World said:

If you are a landlord you will know that leasing a property, whether residential or commercial, comes with a certain amount of responsibility and risk. Whilst all lease agreements should specify the length of the tenancy most of us have heard stories where tenants refuse to leave or are granted new leases by the Court.

A lot of the time this is because the original tenancies have not been contracted outside of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (‘LTA 1954’). Provisions in this Act entitles the tenant to a certain amount of protection against sudden or early termination of the lease and gives right to renew the contract at the end of the term.

However, there are ways to terminate such agreements and if you are looking for a step-by-step guide on how to do it, keep reading.

The safest way to terminate a protected tenancy under LTA 1954 is to serve a Section 25 Notice (‘The Notice’). Whilst there is no standard template of this Notice, it should be drafted carefully, using clear language. It should also include the following:

• Grounds on which you wish to terminate the tenancy:
  • Premises are in disrepair;
  • Arrears of rent;
  • Other breaches of covenants;
  • Offer of suitable alternative accommodation;
  • Tenancy was created by sub-letting;
  • Landlord’s intention to redevelop;
  • Landlord’s intention to occupy.

You must specify all grounds you wish to rely on as you may not be allowed to amend these at a later stage. It is worth noting that if you rely on grounds that purport termination through no fault of the tenant (i.e. if your main grounds are intention to redevelop or occupy) the tenant will be entitled to a compensation of a rateable value upon termination. Both parties can rely on a surveyor to value the premises. In addition, if the tenant or its predecessor has enjoyed the use of premises for 14 years of more, the compensation doubles.

• The Notice must be served not more than 12 months not less than 6 months before the termination date. So if you are looking to terminate a lease as soon as possible, you will have to wait for a minimum six months (from the date of service) before it could be terminated;

• The Notice must be validly served. Your lease will have a clause specifying how and in what way serve could take place. Pay attention to any exclusions of service by email etc.;

• If there are multiple tenants, the Notice must be served on all of them;

• It is always a good idea to specify, in the cover letter to the tenant, that your Section 25 Notice doubles as a notice to quit. You would have complied with those requirements if you provide the tenant a notice period and a termination date (which should be included in your Notice).

Once the Notice is served it cannot be withdrawn or amended. The tenant then has an option to simply accept your Notice or to serve a counter-notice. If an amicable solution cannot be reached, try to resolve the matter through a form of alternative dispute resolution such as mediation. However, if you have exhausted all options and the matter proceeds to Court it would be up to the judge’s discretion to grant the tenant a new lease based on the same terms as the previous agreement.

Finally, it is worth noting that the tenant does not have to run their business from the leased address. It is sufficient for the tenant to store items relating to the business at the premises to attract protection under the LTA 1954.

Covered End said:

Great opening, decent middle, disappointing ending.
I thought he'd be sleeping with the fishes or some such by now

Seriously though, well done the beers are on you, where will you be tomorrow and how will we identify you ?