• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • About
  • My Services
  • Training and Events
  • Landlord Law
Landlord Law Blog

The Landlord Law Blog

Interesting posts on residential landlord & tenant law and practice In England & Wales UK

  • Home
  • Posts
  • News
    & comment
  • Analysis
  • Cases
  • Tips &
    How to
  • Tenants
  • Clinic
    • Ask your question
    • Clinic replies
    • Blog Clinic Fast Track
  • Series
    • Renters Rights Act 2025
    • Renters Rights Bill
    • Election 2024
    • Audios
    • Urban Myths
    • New Welsh Laws
    • Local Authority Help for ‘Green improvements’ to property
    • The end of s21 – Protecting your position
    • End of Section 21
    • Should law and justice be free?
    • Grounds for Eviction
    • HMO Basics

Tenancy Agreements 33 days of tips – Day 17 – Unfair Terms (2)

This post is more than 8 years old

May 3, 2017 by Tessa Shepperson

day17

Practical aspects of Unfair Terms in your tenancy agreement

The Unfair Terms rules (now part of the Consumer Rights Act 2015)  (the Regulations) were discussed on Day 16.

Today we are going to look at how these rules affect tenancy agreement clauses in practice, including one aspect in particular which often causes confusion.  This is the special wording which needs to be included in tenancy agreement clauses which are prohibiting something.

Prohibitions

The rule is that these clauses should include wording, something along the lines of ‘other than with the written permission of the landlord, which will not be unreasonably refused’.

This wording is important as it prevents the clause from being unfair.  It must be included, even if you are certain that you will never permit whatever it is. If you omit the wording, the clause will almost certainly be invalid – which is the complete opposite of what you want!

Example – pets clauses

The classic example is a clause prohibiting pets.  “I will never allow pets in my property” a landlord might declare, crossing the clause out with his pen as he does so.  However, the effect of this is that the clause will be void under the Regulations, entitling the tenants to have whatever messy and noisy pets they like.

We know that this type of wording is required with clauses prohibiting pets as there is legal authority for this.  In a case in Spain (which applies here as these regulations come from a European directive) the Judge said that an outright prohibition would be unfair as it would stop a tenant keeping a goldfish in a bowl.

However, the rule will apply to other prohibitions, for example, prohibitions against re-decoration, repainting the walls in a different colour, or using the tenants own heating appliances.

It is important to remember, the fact that the tenant is entitled to ask permission for something, does not mean that the landlord has *got* to grant it.  So long as you have a reasonable reason for refusal, and (preferably) this is documented, there should be no problem.  There usually will be a reasonable reason, otherwise, you would not have wanted to prohibit whatever-it-is in the first place.

The only cases where the wording will not be necessary is where the action is illegal anyway, such as keeping prohibited drugs or firearms on the premises, using the property for an illegal purpose, or causing a nuisance to neighbours.

Tenancy agreement clauses taking away existing rights

We mentioned on Day 16 that any clause which takes away a right a tenant would otherwise have had is likely to be void under the regulations.

This is why it is so dangerous for non-lawyers to draft or adapt tenancy agreements (and dangerous also for lawyers who are not housing specialists).  Because it is difficult to avoid clauses which take away a tenant’s legal rights unless you have a very good working knowledge of what those rights are in the first place.

For example, clauses are likely to be void if they:

  • Make the tenant responsible (even if only obliquely) for anything within the landlords statutory repairing covenants
  • Say that rent shall be paid ‘without any set off’, as tenants have a legal right to set off in some circumstances
  • Attempt to make the tenant responsible for arranging for the annual gas safety check and any repairs to gas appliances

and so on.

Avoiding inadvertent unfairness

Anyone drafting a tenancy agreement needs to think clearly and consider the actual effect and real meaning of the words being used.  For example

  • A clause which prohibits removing any plants from the garden will also prohibit weeding
  • A clause which prohibits tenants moving the furniture to another room, will include things like kitchen chairs, which is plainly unfair and unrealistic  (better to stipulate that at the end of the tenancy the furniture and contents should be put back in the rooms they were at the start, to facilitate checking contents against the inventory when the tenant leaves).
  • A clause prohibiting keeping combustible materials on the premises would include matches (which would be unfair)

When drafting it is very difficult to prevent this sort of thing creeping in.  Often you are so concentrated on what you are seeking to do,  that it can blind you to the words’ other meanings.  Be particularly wary about adding things on the spur of the moment.

Incorporating other documents into a tenancy agreement

There are times when you will want your tenant to be bound by terms and conditions in some other document.  For example

  • Landlords’ insurance policies.
  • A ‘head lease’, where the property (generally this will be a flat) is owned by the landlord on a long lease
  • Some landlords, particularly in HMO tenancies, also want tenants to also be bound by ‘house rules’

However, you cannot expect tenants to abide by terms and conditions they have never seen.  Therefore you will need to provide them with a copy of the document, or an extract of the terms that will affect them.  Ideally, this should be attached to the tenancy agreement and kept with it.

Attempts to bind tenants by the contents of any document which they have not actually seen will always be considered unfair, and it will always be necessary for you to provide a copy of the document concerned.

Landlord Law Tenancy AgreementsNB Find out more about my Tenancy Agreement Service on Landlord Law

All Landlord Law tenancy agreements are created via our document generator which allows for you to add extra clauses – for example, if you need to refer to an external document.

click-here

 

Previous Post
Next Post

Filed Under: Tips and How to Tagged With: Tenancy Agreement 33 days

Notes:

Please check the date of the post - remember, if it is an old post, the law may have changed since it was written.

You should always get independent legal advice before taking any action.

Reader Interactions

Please read our terms of use and comments policy. Comments close after three months

Comments

  1. Lawcruncher says

    May 3, 2017 at 10:25 am

    “…it is so dangerous for non-lawyers to draft or adapt tenancy agreements (and dangerous also for lawyers who are not housing specialists).”

    I should like to emphasise just how important the above is. You may say “A lawyer would say that”, but if you doubt its truth go to http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/forum.php and look at the posts on break clauses. Whilst non-lawyers may draft well and not all lawyers are good draftsmen, it is unwise for anyone without the relevant experience and knowledge, however well-educated or intelligent, to try his hand at legal drafting. Legal drafting is trickier than people think.

    Here is a rough guide to what to look for in a tenancy agreement: http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?73998-How-do-you-know-if-your-tenancy-agreement-is-a-good-one

  2. Tessa Shepperson says

    May 3, 2017 at 10:30 am

    There are also inadvertent ambiguities.

    Many English words have double meanings – and the contract will generally be interpreted against the party who drafted it – ie the landlord. It is SO EASY to completely fail to realise that something can be read in a different way to the way you intended.

  3. Peter Jackson says

    May 3, 2017 at 5:09 pm

    Whilst it may be inadvisable for non-lawyers to draft tenancy agreements the same would seem to apply to some lawyers.

    I have been trying to get a mortgage to buy a property that is already tenanted. The current tenancy agreement was downloaded from the NLA. The solicitors for the lenders insisted on two changes
    1) adding a section 8 grounds 2 clause
    2) removing the “other than with the written permission of the landlord, which will not be unreasonably refused” from the section prohibiting subletting.
    The first is of course pointless when the tenancy started before the mortgage, and as Tessa and the OFT have written the second would likely make the term unfair and have the opposite effect to that intended.
    so
    After months of trying to satisfy their requirements I have decided to try to find another lender.

  4. Lawcruncher says

    May 3, 2017 at 5:40 pm

    To Peter Jackson

    I fear you may find that another lender will insist on the same variations. It is probably the lender, advised by in-house lawyers, who has requirements set in stone about these and other matters.

    Beyond what you say, a Ground 2 clause is always useless because there is no such things as a ground 2 notice. To exercise Ground 2 you have to have given a Ground I notice.

    • Peter Jackson says

      May 3, 2017 at 6:37 pm

      I thought it was the same sort of notice as grounds 1 but saying that grounds 2 might be used

  5. Tessa Shepperson says

    May 3, 2017 at 5:48 pm

    @Peter You could put them on notice that you will be claiming compensation if you are unable to set aside a subletting due to their insistence on changing the wording and thus invalidating the clause. This may make them think about it a bit.

    • Peter Jackson says

      May 3, 2017 at 6:54 pm

      I had asked them (well my solicitors did) for wording that would satisfy their clients whilst not being unfair. They did not come back with anything.
      There were lots of other annoying things they did.After 9 months I was fed up. My own solicitor said he never wished to deal with them again.

  6. Michael Barnes says

    May 9, 2017 at 11:33 pm

    Interesting that the Spanish judge considers it unreasonable to prohibit a goldfish in a bowl.

    I’ve had carpet ruined by kicking over a bucket whilst changing the water for a goldfish (I did it in my own home!), so even a goldfish is not without risk.

  7. Lucy says

    June 3, 2017 at 5:31 am

    Hi,

    In my tenancy agreement, there is a no pet clause, which states “other than with the written permission of the landlord”, but not “which will not be unreasonably refused” – does removing part of the statement make the clause invalid?

    Thanks

    • Tessa Shepperson says

      June 3, 2017 at 7:47 am

      It may make it unenforceable. I don’t have a copy of the Spanish case so don’t have the precise details of the decision.

      That would be my interpretation but we can only know for sure when a Judge in a court case makes a decision about it.

Primary Sidebar

Sign up to the Landlord Law mailing list and get a free eBook
Sign up

Post updates

Never miss another post!
Sign up to our Post Updates or the monthly Round Up
Sign up

Worried about insurance?

Insurance Course

Sign up to the Landlord Law mailing list

And get a free eBook

Sign up

Footer

Disclaimer

The purpose of this blog is to provide information, comment and discussion.

Please, when reading, always check the date of the post. Be careful about reading older posts as the law may have changed since they were written.

Note that although we may, from time to time, give helpful comments to readers’ questions, these can only be based on the information given by the reader in his or her comment, which may not contain all material facts.

Any comments or suggestions provided by Tessa or any guest bloggers should not, therefore be relied upon as a substitute for legal advice from a qualified lawyer regarding any actual legal issue or dispute.

Nothing on this website should be construed as legal advice or perceived as creating a lawyer-client relationship (apart from the Fast Track block clinic service – so far as the questioners only are concerned).

Please also note that any opinion expressed by a guest blogger is his or hers alone, and does not necessarily reflect the views of Tessa Shepperson, or the other writers on this blog.

Note that we do not accept any unsolicited guest blogs, so please do not ask. Neither do we accept advertising or paid links.

Cookies

You can find out more about our use of 'cookies' on this website here.

Other sites

Landlord Law
The Renters Guide
Lodger Landlord
Your Law Store

Legal

Landlord Law Blog is © 2006 – 2025 Tessa Shepperson

Note that Tessa is an introducer for Alan Boswell Insurance Brokers and will get a commission from sales made via links on this website.

Property Investor Bureau The Landlord Law Blog


Copyright © 2025 · Log in · Privacy | Contact | Comments Policy