How much notice should we give?

davo2001

Howdy,

Have been renting the same house for the last 9 years, we've had modest increases in that time and have been happy enough, the last increase was 2 years ago and we signed a 12 month contract then.

Received a letter from the LL yesterday looking for a 40% increase in rent (all done correctly),we are not in a RPZ.

As it happens we signed contracts for purchasing our own house yesterday also but as of yet do not have a closing date so i haven't said anything to the LL.

How much notice do we have to give? This massive increase has left a bit of a sour taste in my mouth as we have been model tenants, so I only want to give what is legally obligated.

Subutai

davo2001 wrote: »

Howdy,

Have been renting the same house for the last 9 years, we've had modest increases in that time and have been happy enough, the last increase was 2 years ago and we signed a 12 month contract then.

Received a letter from the LL yesterday looking for a 40% increase in rent (all done correctly),we are not in a RPZ.

As it happens we signed contracts for purchasing our own house yesterday also but as of yet do not have a closing date so i haven't said anything to the LL.

How much notice do we have to give? This massive increase has left a bit of a sour taste in my mouth as we have been model tenants, so I only want to give what is legally obligated.

112 days.

Fol20

Honestly, the ll needs to protect himself. You may have been model tenants but in x months time you will never speak to the ll again and he will need to get new tenants in. The RPZ stuff has really hit home that decent ll pay the consequences if they dont ensure they are at market rate so if your not in rpz zone. You would be absolutely stupid not to increase to market rate when you still have a chance

davo2001

Fol20 wrote: »

You would be absolutely stupid not to increase to market rate when you still have a chance

It's well above market rate now.

Subutai

davo2001 wrote: »

It's well above market rate now.

Has he not supplied the requisite comparator properties. If not, then the increase is invalid and you should continue to pay your current rent.

judeboy101

If you signed a 12month contract 2 years ago, then leave tomorrow. You have no contract to honour.

pc7

If you've had a good relationship with LL up until now, I'd explain you've signed for a house and can you work something out between yourselves until you have a move in date.

1874

At this stage, after signing a 12 mth contract 2 years ago, you have been on part 4 a year, and an ongoing tenancy, although the overlap of dates sounds unusual, if youve been there 9 years and signed a 12mth contract (2 years ago) at the end of 7 years, seems unusual, why sign a fixed term contract in year 7? unless there were new terms/rent amount and you just mean you signed that, as your tenancy would have been a 4 year tenancy then, sound slike you are in year1 of a 3rd ongoing tenancy, you could for the moment carry on as is, explain your situation to the landlord, he may not be aware you are about to move, potential changes in the RPZ may have spooked the landlord and your rent may not be in line with current rents in the area.
I second the opinion of speaking to the landlord, communication/dialogue first, then hash it out.

Old diesel

Fol20 wrote: »

Honestly, the ll needs to protect himself. You may have been model tenants but in x months time you will never speak to the ll again and he will need to get new tenants in. The RPZ stuff has really hit home that decent ll pay the consequences if they dont ensure they are at market rate so if your not in rpz zone. You would be absolutely stupid not to increase to market rate when you still have a chance

40 percent is nonetheless a serious hit to a tenant out of the blue.

There can be no avoiding that.

It's also very hard for someone to understand where is this 40 percent demand coming from.

A tenant won't always know about landlord tax and may actually think that

"actually I wouldnt mind a 4 percent rise every year in my job - so why is he protecting himself against being limited to a 4 percent rise".

davo2001

1874 wrote: »

I second the opinion of speaking to the landlord, communication/dialogue first, then hash it out.

Thanks for the replies.

This is what I was planning on doing but was just wondering of any statutory notice period given my current situation, to be fair, the rent increase won't kick in until June and we should be out of the house by then anyways (hopefully).

Assetbacked

You are not going to be chased through the courts for an inadequate notice period.

1874

davo2001 wrote: »

Thanks for the replies.

This is what I was planning on doing but was just wondering of any statutory notice period given my current situation, to be fair, the rent increase won't kick in until June and we should be out of the house by then anyways (hopefully).

Someone mentioned above, 112 days, this is correct for tenant to give notice for greater than 8 years, either dont give too early or give notice and let your landlord you may need minor extensions, tenancy may be dissolved by mutual consent too.
Regarding the June date, maybe your landlord IS spooked by word of the RPZ coming into the area or overall (either incorrectly or they just heard of the rpz) and are thinking about after you leave, in which case your rent may be below market value and they have done you a big favour and now they want to return to current market rates, may have allowed exception because they knew you and could rely on and trust you. I imagine they might be reluctant to get stuck with a new tenant by offering them such a favour as they'd never get a bad tenant out with a below market rental rate and they could be stuck with that rate and a bad tenant, its unfortunate but thats the situation that the regulations/legislation has put in place, well meaning but ill considered laws have done no one favours, well no one except bad landlords and dad tenants.

Fol20

Assetbacked wrote: »

You are not going to be chased through the courts for an inadequate notice period.

You dont know this. Likelyhood is low but who knows

Fol20

I think as others have mentioned. Have a chat with the ll. He might allow a months notice

dudara

judeboy101 wrote: »

If you signed a 12month contract 2 years ago, then leave tomorrow. You have no contract to honour.

This is incorrect. They have an obligation to provide the correct notice period to the landlord.

Having said that, a chat with the landlord might result in a quicker termination period that could suit everyone.

godtabh

judeboy101 wrote: »

If you signed a 12month contract 2 years ago, then leave tomorrow. You have no contract to honour.

Thats not the way it works.

Claw Hammer

judeboy101 wrote: »

If you signed a 12month contract 2 years ago, then leave tomorrow. You have no contract to honour.

Nonsense. If the tenant remains in occupation after the expiry of the lease period, the letting continues on the same basis as before. The notice periods to be given are set out by law according to the length of time the tenancy has lasted.

Assetbacked

Fol20 wrote: »

You dont know this. Likelyhood is low but who knows

Well, it is, as you say a low likelihood. This is on the basis that the actual loss to the landlord is not the rent but perhaps the inconvenience of not having the extra notice period to replace the tenant. In the current market, it would be very difficult to say the extra time was needed, therefore I cannot envisage a loss, let alone a more than a minimal one.

Fol20

Assetbacked wrote: »

Well, it is, as you say a low likelihood. This is on the basis that the actual loss to the landlord is not the rent but perhaps the inconvenience of not having the extra notice period to replace the tenant. In the current market, it would be very difficult to say the extra time was needed, therefore I cannot envisage a loss, let alone a more than a minimal one.

Your right. I wouldnt go to the hassle or expense of chasing a tenant however some would out of principle. I dont have the time or money to do that but you would be surprised.

If a tenant gives one weeks notice which i have aeen happen, they will loose out be it in their deposit or lack of reference. Some ll might be away when notice is given and might not be able to prepare quick enough depending on notice. Most ll are ok with a month. Just have a chat with the ll and see what he says.

GGTrek

Fol20 wrote: »

Your right. I wouldnt go to the hassle or expense of chasing a tenant however some would out of principle. I dont have the time or money to do that but you would be surprised.

If a tenant gives one weeks notice which i have aeen happen, they will loose out be it in their deposit or lack of reference. Some ll might be away when notice is given and might not be able to prepare quick enough depending on notice. Most ll are ok with a month. Just have a chat with the ll and see what he says.

I do not care about the notice tenants give me as long as it is reasonable. Reasonable for me means around 10 calendar days so that I shall have the time to put an ad in daft for a few days before he/she moves, print out and sign all the paperwork and deliver it to my property manager. I had a few stupid tenants giving me just 2-3 days, I told them I should do the same when terminating on my side and see how they would feel. Always pushed back on anything below 7 days since it is really taking the proverbial p...s. I would say in the current market 10-12 days are a reasonable timeframe for organizing final inspection, marketing and booking time in the property manager agenda, anything less is taking the p..s.

Fol20

Personally, i dont accept anything less than a month. I want new tenants moving in the same day they leave and if they only give me a week and half notice. Usually new tenants will not move in on time as they have to provide notice to their current setup among other things.