Breaking a contract

dangerousdavem

I signed up for a 1 Year fixed lease with my gf and it is due to finish on the 1st Feb 2013. We have found somewhere else to live so we gave our landlord our notice in both writing and by phone and she responded with a text message saying to contact the estate agents we dealt with when we moved in. Since then our estate agent said that because we have broken our contract and that this is a legal issue we can only communicate by writing. We have had a few viewings that have been organised by our estate agent and yesterday she informed us by email that she has found someone to take over our lease. We have already found somewhere else to live and hope to move in on the 1st December. We asked her when the new people want to move and she said either the first or second week of December and in the meantime she wants to remove a bed and a table from our place. Our problem is that our rent comes out next Wed/Thurs and we don't know whether to cancel our direct debit or not. We need that money as a down payment for our new place and seeing as our landlord already has our deposit we don't want to be moving out of here minus 2 grand that we are owed. Does anyone have any advice as to what to do? Thanks?

whatnext

Ask if you will be getting your deposit back in writing.

If they say no due to breach of lease then respond by saying you will therefore have to honour the lease, and see how they react.

Call their bluff... But do it all in writing / email. You can't really make your situation any worse.

odds_on

You are breaking a fixed term lease, and the landlord/agent has to find the new tenant, therefore, they are entitled to retain all costs in so doing from your deposit.

Instead of just giving notice and to ensure the return your deposit in full (excepting any damage in excess of normal wear and tear) you should have sought written permission to "assign" the remainder of the lease. With permission granted, it is your responsibility to find the new tenant and to pay any costs.

As you have not gone for the assignment option, you you must cover the agents reasonable costs. The landlord is also entitled to any short fall of rent either the time from when you move out to when the new tenant moves in. If the rent is lower than you paid, the landlord is also able to claim the difference from you.

kkelliher

odds_on wrote: »

You are breaking a fixed term lease, and the landlord/agent has to find the new tenant, therefore, they are entitled to retain all costs in so doing from your deposit.

Instead of just giving notice and to ensure the return your deposit in full (excepting any damage in excess of normal wear and tear) you should have sought written permission to "assign" the remainder of the lease. With permission granted, it is your responsibility to find the new tenant and to pay any costs.

As you have not gone for the assignment option, you you must cover the agents reasonable costs. The landlord is also entitled to any short fall of rent either the time from when you move out to when the new tenant moves in. If the rent is lower than you paid, the landlord is also able to claim the difference from you.

I dont believe this is correct. When the prtb legislation was brought in it set in law the notice required for various lengths of time spent in a property.you are not allowed to contract out of these rules and therefore the fixed term lease idea is actually not worth the paper it is writtin on in respect to the timeframe.

the following is the required notice periods for differing times



Notice Period Duration of Tenancy
28 days Less than 6 months
35 days >6 months and <1 year
42 days >1 year and <2 years
56 days >2 years and years
84 days >3 years and <4 years
112 days >4 years

murphaph

kkelliher wrote: »

I dont believe this is correct. When the prtb legislation was brought in it set in law the notice required for various lengths of time spent in a property.you are not allowed to contract out of these rules and therefore the fixed term lease idea is actually not worth the paper it is writtin on in respect to the timeframe.

the following is the required notice periods for differing times



Notice Period Duration of Tenancy
28 days Less than 6 months
35 days >6 months and <1 year
42 days >1 year and <2 years
56 days >2 years and years
84 days >3 years and <4 years
112 days >4 years

Fixed term leases are worth the paper they are written on. The above poster is entirely correct that in breaking one, the OP is liable for the landlord's reasonable costs associated with finding a new tenant and any unavoidable loss in rental income.

The PRTB rules are notwithstanding a fixed term lease, which affords the tenant generally more rights than the landlord, which is why most landlords opt for month to month tenancies after the initial year is up.

athtrasna

kkelliher wrote: »

I dont believe this is correct. When the prtb legislation was brought in it set in law the notice required for various lengths of time spent in a property.you are not allowed to contract out of these rules and therefore the fixed term lease idea is actually not worth the paper it is writtin on in respect to the timeframe.

the following is the required notice periods for differing times



Notice Period Duration of Tenancy
28 days Less than 6 months
35 days >6 months and <1 year
42 days >1 year and <2 years
56 days >2 years and years
84 days >3 years and <4 years
112 days >4 years

What you "believe" is wrong. The time periods you refer to are for Part IV tenancies. They do not apply to fixed term leases.

not even wrong

kkelliher wrote: »

When the prtb legislation was brought in it set in law the notice required for various lengths of time spent in a property.you are not allowed to contract out of these rules and therefore the fixed term lease idea is actually not worth the paper it is writtin on in respect to the timeframe.

This is incorrect, sections 26 and 54 of the Residential Tenancies Act specifically allow the tenant to contract in to greater security of tenure. In other words, the tenant cannot sign away their rights, but they can sign in to additional rights.

fasttalkerchat

Check that your contract is being assigned to this new person. If that is the case you are not breaking your contract.

odds_on

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

Check that your contract is being assigned to this new person. If that is the case you are not breaking your contract.

When a lease is being legally assigned, a Deed of Assignment must be drawn up and signed by all relevant parties involved, the out-going tenant, any remaining tenants and the in-coming tenant - this confirms that parties are in agreement with the terms of the deed and the lease.

However, as the tenant (the OP) did not request permission to assign and the fact that the landlord's agent had to find the new tenant could well imply that the tenant did not want to assign, but break the lease. This gives the landlord the option of a new 12 month lease with the new tenant - and the extra costs involved, over an assignment - on least of which is a new tenancy requiring registration with the PRTB and the registration fee. This is especially so as there will only be about 2 months of of the lease remaining - few tenants want a 2 month lease.

If you read some of the PRTB adjudication and tribunal decisions you will find that where one party of a lease has accepted something from the other party (even if it is not done within the regulations) then that can be accepted as binding: A tenant breaking a Part 4 lease verbally, (should be in writing) but completely accepted by the landlord, the landlord cannot later claim that the termination was invalid because it was not in writing. There should have an objection or refusal when the notice was received. You cannot put the cart before the horse.

You will very often find that a landlord will accept a Notice of Termination from a tenant during a fixed term lease. However, the landlord is not obliged to remind the tenant that if he breaks a fixed term lease the the tenant may forfeit his deposit.