Here is a blog clinic question from John (not his real name) who is a landlord:
Problem: Joint tenancy with 6 months break out clause.
One of the tenants has left and will not pay her share. The other tenant is staying and he might agree to pay the full rent.
Should I replace the tenancy agreement to show only the tenant who is staying in the property?
The other tenant has left so, as long as I receive rent from the other tenant is fine for me, but the other tenant should no longer be liable to the contract terms?
If the tenant who has left has given notice under the break clause this will have ended the tenancy (depending on how the clause is worded). If the remaining tenant then stays on and pays rent, then this will create a new tenancy just between you and the remaining tenant.
If the tenant who has left did NOT give notice to end the tenancy then they will remain liable under the agreement! Even though they are not living there.
However if the remaining tenant is willing and able to pay the whole rent, it is probably best to give them a new agreement now, in either case.
Note that the outgoing tenant will be liable for rent either up to the date they ended the tenancy under the break clause (if this was done) or until the new tenancy agreement is signed with the remaining tenant.
To find out more about tenancy agreements and the correct tenancy agreement to use in any given situation see this free >> Which Tenancy guide here.
What if the 1st tenant has given notice but the 2nd tenant will not pay the additional rent but will not move out?
Is the 1st tenant still liable until the 2nd tenant is evicted?
|My understanding is that if the correct notice has been given under the break clause then that tenancy will have ended and the tenant who moved out will not be liable for the rent any more.
If the remaining tenant then failed to pay the rent, the landlord should move as swiftly as possible to the courts to obtain an eviction order.
If tenant 1 terminated properly then that ends the right of occupation for tenant 2 and if he didnt move out, wouldnt that also make him liable for double the daily rent under the Distress for Rent Act 1737?
I’d have a go if I was a landlord
Ben,
Now what if tenant 1 has not told tenant 2 and tenant 1 hides any mail that the agent/landlord sends to tenant 2 until tenant 1 moves out…. (Give most items will be send to them in joint names.)
I am starting to think that all tenants that are listed on an AST should be made to be garnitures for each other until such time as they have all signed a new AST. Or it should somehow be made that a notice must be signed by all the tenants that are listed on an joint AST.
With joint tenancies all rights and liabilities are what are termed ‘Jointly and severally’, meaning the actions of tenant as a group and as individuals are largely the same.
To terminate a tenancy properly the tenant has to give formal written notice and because of the joint and several rule 1 tenant can terminate unilaterally and it affects the other tenant. This is very common in relationship breakdown cases and has always been common advice given by homeless units where someone comes in from a joint tenancy fleeing domestic violence from the other tenant.
However surrender (an unequivocal act like handing back the keys) cannot be done unilaterally and the other tenant would still have the legal right to remain.
Your hypothetical example of hiding mail happens a lot believe it or not. Things then get very messy. There is no quick answer to such cases, the cricumstances and the factual stuff are too varied