Would the LL….

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #45917
    sjhall
    Participant

    be entitled to a payment of HB for a notice period?

    I have a case where the tenant signed a TA for 12 months which was to expire in June 13.

    The tenant then vacated the property on the 19.02.13 and was placed into temporary accommodation  by our homeless section.

    We then receive a letter from the former LL complaining as they thought we had started to pay the clmnt direct as payments to the LL had stopped. (This is not true, payments only stopped because the tenant had vacated.) However in the letter the LL states he gave the tenant 1 months notice to quit due to rent arrears. The notice period started from the 15.02.2013.

    Unfortunately we never copied all of the pages from the original TA so I cannot see if there was a proviso that a months notice had to be be given. Under these circumstances would you accept that there was an overlapping rent liability and pay HB to the LL for the remaining notice period?

     

    #129400
    mairir
    Participant

    Yes, I would pay (don’t work for Revenues tho).

    Even though the landlord has given the tenant a notice the tenant needn’t have moved out on the day the notice expired (and they didn’t by the sounds of it). By law a landlord has to get a court order to evict a tenant although I’m assuming there’s more to the case as it’s not usual AFAIK for someone to be housed in temporary accommodation at this stage in proceedings. Effectively by not notifying the landlord that they were going to move out shortly after the date requested the tenant remains liable for the rent after the 19th. After all, if the landlord was relying on the tenant to move out on 15th and went to take possession on 16th they couldn’t have because the tenant was still there. And it doesn’t sound like the keys were returned either as you say the landlord didn’t know the tenant had moved out.

    So while the landlord wanted the tenant out on 15th he may have been resigned to the fact that the tenant would be in the property (and liable for the rent) for a lot longer while he took court action.

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.