What's the point of a lease end date?

zagmund

I'm not trying to fire up an us vs them debate, just trying to get my head around something that has struck me from reading threads on here as an interested observer for a while.

It sounds like as a LL you can't just rock up on the date the lease ends and ask for possession of your property back. That's reasonable enough since we're dealing with peoples homes. But it seems that neither can you just serve notice in advance and *know* that your tenant will comply. You can hope they will comply.

So, what's the point in having an end date other than having something to rely on if/when it gets to PTRB or the courts?

I know it's not the same, but if I have a 12 month employment contract I can't turn up on day 1 of month 13 and still get paid. That's why there's an end date specified.

I'm not trying to debate the rights or wrongs, really just trying to undrrstanf what the lease termination date represents if not the date the lease is terminated.

z

shruikan2553

The lease is just the length of time the person is liable for rent until. The LL is meant to get paid for those 12 (typically) months by the person on the lease. After the end date the LL can no longer be sure how much more time they will have the person paying them for.

The_Morrigan

In the scheme of things the RTA is relatively new and prior to its enactment tenancy was ruled by lease agreements. I don't think there has been much in the way of harmony between the two since.

Bateman

The_Morrigan wrote: »

In the scheme of things the RTA is relatively new and prior to its enactment tenancy was ruled by lease agreements. I don't think there has been much in the way of harmony between the two since.

Would definitely agree with that last point

seamus

A fixed term lease provides security of tenure for both landlord and tenant. Neither party can terminate the lease except within the provisions of that lease. So if the landlord decides they want to move their daughter in, or change it into offices, they have to wait until the end of the fixed term.

Likewise if the tenant suddenly decides they want to go to Australia, they cannot leave until the end of the term.

As you say, the main issue which is increasingly coming up is compliance. The PRTB are unofficially telling tenants to not comply and to automatically appeal termination notices to buy more time. This is causing massive backlogs in the PRTB process. The process is also being gamed because if you provide incomplete/incorrect documentation, they give you time to correct it. So tenants are likely being unofficially advised to drag out the process by "accidentally" making mistakes on their forms.

There needs to be a mechanism to remove tenants either way. Something as simple as the right of a landlord to evict a tenant at the end of the notice period (change the locks, etc), but if the PRTB finds that the tenant was in the right, there's an automatic compensation payment of 12 month's rent + damages to the tenant, or something. This would mean that honest & decent landlords have a method of securing access to their property, and tenants have a means of recompense against dodgy landlords.

This would give an avenue for honest and decent landlords

The_Morrigan

Proposed overholding under a fixed term tenancy.

195.—(1) In this section “relevant dwelling” means a dwelling, the subject of a tenancy that is for a fixed period of at least 6 months.

(2) The tenant of a relevant dwelling, if he or she intends to remain (on whatever basis, if any, that is open to him or her to do so) in occupation of the dwelling after the expiry of the period of the tenancy concerned, shall notify the landlord of that intention.

(3) That notification shall not be made to the landlord—

(a) any later than 1 month before, nor

(b) any sooner than 3 months before,

the expiry of the period of that tenancy.

(4) If a tenant fails to comply with subsection (2) and the landlord suffers loss or damage in consequence of that failure the landlord may make a complaint to the Board under Part 6 that he or she has suffered such loss or damage.

(5) An adjudicator or the Tribunal, on the hearing of such a complaint, may make a determination, if the adjudicator or the Tribunal considers it proper to do so, that the tenant shall pay to the complainant an amount by way of damages for that loss or damage.

This is also causing havoc with regards to a lease coming to an end.

If a landlord gives notice to quit/notice of non-renewal of the existing lease before the tenant has asked to stay on under Part IV what happens?

The RTA says they are liable for any costs incurred, but what if the landlord only intended the house to be let for a year and then needed it for themselves. It could take months and months for them to gain possession again.

ted1

11.5 month leases are begining to sound good

shruikan2553

ted1 wrote: »

11.5 month leases are begining to sound good

Why? Once you hit 6 months you get part 4 and all it entails. 5 months means more costs if they want to rent it out again.