Terms & Conditions

[Anonymous]

Sorry! mind gone blank…must be the sun….

Change of address, monthly rent to monthly rent. Tenancy starts 11/4/06, but clmt only moved in 14/4/06, so same week. Am I right to end previous address claim and start new address claim on 11/4/06? Would I also award 3 days unavoidable overlap (if conditions met) on previous claim?

Thanks….

[Darren Broughton]

You would start the new address claim on 14/4/06 – any overlap for old property can be paid subject to usual rules

[Kevin D]

In my opinion, yes to the date of liability change (11 Apr 2006); but no to the overlap unless the clmt satisfies [b:ff5ae343eb]HBR06 7(6)[u:ff5ae343eb](e)[/u:ff5ae343eb][/b:ff5ae343eb]. Overlap cannot be paid under 7(6)[u:ff5ae343eb](d)[/u:ff5ae343eb] because the clmt had not already moved in.

Just for clarification; there is no “old” / “new” claim – it is simply a change in liability with a possible overlap thrown in for good measure for the same, on-going, claim.

Regards

[Anonymous]

I’m going to have a go at this, but only from the point of view that I don’t fully get it either, so I’m putting up this so I can be put right.

I’ve already seen posting about A8, which I think covers this to some degree, by Peter Barker and others, arguing very persuasively for both sides that there is, or isn’t a legal basis for the advice in this circular, depending on how you interpret the new regs.

So here goes. :15: 🙄

Pay at the old address until the day of vacation. From your posting I would assume that this would be 13/4/06 in effect, if person moved into new property next day. Pay at new address from day of occupation, in this case 14/4/06.
If there is an unavoidable overlap AFTER customer has moved into new property, then this can be considered, but no overlapping payment for period before customer moved in.
If liability at old address ends on 10/6/2006, then only one days rent due on old property, (monday), as well as three days rent on new (friday – sunday, but from what you have written about overlap, I don’t think this applies, as you seem to infer that liability at old property continued until Thursday 13th.

So I would look to pay 4/7 of old rent, and 3/7 of new rent, and consider any overlap fom 14/4/06 only, if conditions met and therefore applicable. :15: 😯

So, that’s what I think, and I’m more than willing to be corrected, 😳 but if on the off chance I’m right, ( 😯 ), I hope that helps. 8)

Written before above postings by Darren and KevinD, but posted long after!! You can tell that by their succinct and short replies, and my mental meanderings, these are definitely the surmisings of a twisted and tortured mind!! 😈 😈 8)

[Author]

Posts