Buying or selling a property with a sitting tenant

seamus

So, this is a theoretical one based off of a thread in Accommodation (which may be against the rules? )

Just wondering what people think the likely (or actual) outcome would be in the following situations:

Imagine you have a person selling a house which is currently rented. Tenants have been legally served notice to quit, but are overholding and the PRTB dispute process is pending. The contract of sale between purchaser and buyer requires vacant possession. The only two obvious solutions here are for the buyer to wait or withdraw.
Theoretically though what would happen, if:

1. The landlord illegally evicted the tenants and completed the sale?
2. The buyer and seller choose to waive the "vacant possession" clause and proceed with the sale?
3. The tenant leaves but doesn't inform the landlord they've left.

nuac

This reads like an exam/assignment question.

If so, have a go at it yourself

seamus

No, it's actually not, I'm not a legal student, just an armchair bullsh1tter

MarkAnthony

Is the buyer purchasing with a mortgage? If so it's unlikely the vacant possession clause can be vitiated.

Mr. Incognito

Vacant possession is a negotiated contractual term.

I would expect the parties to negotiate a resolution

nuac

seamus wrote: »

No, it's actually not, I'm not a legal student, just an armchair bullsh1tter

Frankest reply I have ever seen here.

Pat Mustard

seamus wrote: »

1. The landlord illegally evicted the tenants and completed the sale?
2. The buyer and seller choose to waive the "vacant possession" clause and proceed with the sale?
3. The tenant leaves but doesn't inform the landlord they've left.

Without tackling question no.1, which is the toughest question:

2. Purchaser agrees to buy subject to the tenancy. Not a problem for the Vendor.
3. There is vacant possession. Sale can proceed as usual.

You will note that I have not dealt with the landlord and tenant aspects of the scenario which is a bit of a minefield.

GerardKeating

The Mustard wrote: »

Without tackling question no.1, which is the toughest question:

2. Purchaser agrees to buy subject to the tenancy. Not a problem for the Vendor.
3. There is vacant possession. Sale can proceed as usual.

You will note that I have not dealt with the landlord and tenant aspects of the scenario which is a bit of a minefield.

In Theory, if tenants are illegally evicted, they could go to court and get an injunction to resume the tenancy, how would that work if the landlord had completed the sale between the eviction and court case?

MarkAnthony

GerardKeating wrote: »

In Theory, if tenants are illegally evicted, they could go to court and get an injunction to resume the tenancy, how would that work if the landlord had completed the sale between the eviction and court case?

I'd suggest (through no practical experience) that injunctive relief would be very difficult to obtain. Damages would seem sufficient.

GerardKeating

MarkAnthony wrote: »

I'd suggest (through no practical experience) that injunctive relief would be very difficult to obtain. Damages would seem sufficient.

I wonder if the Judge would/could rule that the tenancy passed to the new Landlord?

MarkAnthony

GerardKeating wrote: »

I wonder if the Judge would/could rule that the tenancy passed to the new Landlord?

Very interesting question I don't stand a chance of answering

Mr. Incognito

Successors in title on notice of the tenancy will be bound by it. The law is pretty straightforward on that point.

One of the grounds for terminating a tenancy under the act is a sale.

If the tenants over hold you can go to the court for an order to have them removed and enforce that or wait a year for the prtb adjudication and tribunal to run and face a situation where you would have to enforce it through the courts yourself as they are very very very slow to do so.

Personally id be straight down the courts for an order for vacant possession.