Money owed by the tenant cannot be so offset against the proceeds of sale of the goods. Upon the termination of a tenancy, the tenant is required to give vacant possession of the demised premises. Many leases will impose an express obligation to do so, but in the normal course of events one will be implied. A failure to do so amounts to a trespass. Where the tenant leaves any possessions behind, the landlord becomes the bailee of them. As bailee, the landlord has both rights and obligations. The goods are

Pursuant to section 33(2) of the Deregulation Act 2015 (DA 2015), any notice served pursuant to section 21 of the Housing Act 1988 (HA 1988) will be invalid where: • the tenant made a complaint about the condition of the property before the section 21 notice was served, and the landlord failed to reply within 14 days of the complaint, or provided an inadequate response, or served a section 21 notice following the complaint, • the

In Street v Mountford, the House of Lords confirmed that regardless of the label that the parties put on an arrangement between them, the question of whether a person is a tenant or a licensee (which includes a lodger) will depend upon whether that person has exclusive possession for a term at a rent. As such, lodgers, who share possession with a landlord, will not be tenants. Rather, a lodger will have a right to occupy a room (typically) and will have the right to use shared spaces,

If the landlord needs to borrow to carry out the works and intends to carry out those works then, in principle, notwithstanding there is no provision in the lease, it is thought that

The purpose of a rent review memorandum is to record the fact that a rent review in terms of the lease has taken place, and its outcome. Given the risk, identified in R (on the application of Bello) v Lewisham London Borough Council, that an unimplemented rent review may be triggered many years later (and possibly following one or more assignments of the tenancy) it is essential to complete a rent review memorandum, and to keep it with the lease, even if the agreed outcome of the review is a 'nil uplift' so that the rent passing under the lease does not change. See Precedent: Rent review memorandum—commercial lease. When the reviewed rent is determined its proper recording

When demised premises are situated in a larger plot of land held by the immediate lessor out of which other leases have been granted, provision will usually be made for the use of those common parts. They might be a shared entrance hall, an area for the stage of bins, for recreation or parking spaces. So that good order might be maintained, provision will be made as to the basis upon which any given lessee might use those areas. Often it will be the lease itself which governs the use. Sometimes, there will be a separate agreement, independent of the lease albeit that the status as lessee will give the entitlement to enter into it. In each case, however, it will be necessary to interpret the lease or agreement to determine the nature of the right

Under the rule against derogation from grant, someone who agrees to confer a particular benefit on another person must not do anything to substantially deprive the other person of the enjoyment of that benefit (Harmer v Jumbil (Nigeria) Tin Areas Ltd). The rule applies to the grant of easements and rights granted for a term of years. For examples of derogation from grant, see the section entitled ‘Derogation from grant—Substantial interference’ in Practice Note: Derogation from grant. We also refer you to Practice Note: Derogation from grant—easements and other rights. To assess

Notices to quit an agricultural tenancy There are specific rules relating to notices to quit tenancies under the Agricultural Holding Act 1986 (AHA 1986). We refer you to Practice Note: Agricultural tenancies—notices to quit an agricultural holding for the requirements under common law and the AHA 1986 in respect of notices to quit an agricultural holding. Under the AHA 1986, a notice to quit (if valid at common law) is, prima facie, effective to terminate the tenancy. The Notice to Quit may be unqualified, ie state no reason for its being given, or contain one or more of the reasons contained in AHA 1986, s 27(3) or contain one or more of

The consequences of failing to comply with the regime for protecting residential tenancy deposits are set out in Practice Note: Tenancy deposit schemes. See in particular 'Consequences of late or non-compliance'. Section 215 of the Housing Act 2004 (HA 2004) provides that a notice under section 21 of the Housing Act 1988 (a 'section 21 notice') may not be served (paraphrasing) when the deposit is not held in an authorised scheme, the initial requirements of the scheme have not been complied with, or the prescribed information has not been

By the granting of a lease, the landlord deprives themselves of the right to possession of the premises during its currency; and, if they enter without the tenant's permission, or without reserving to themselves the right to do so, they are liable to be treated as a trespasser and to have breached their implied covenant for quiet enjoyment. Hence, in the absence of a special stipulation or a right given by statute, the landlord may not enter to do repairs—see Commentary: Right of entry: Halsbury's Laws of England [302]. However, under section 16 of the Housing Act 1988 (HA 1988), it is an implied term of an assured tenancy (AT) (and therefore an assured shorthold tenancies (ASTs)) that the landlord is entitled to access and facilities to repair where the term is less than seven years in length in

This Q&A is limited to a narrow question affecting the potential validity of a section 21 notice, which is whether the expiry of a valid energy performance certificate (EPC) affects the validity of a notice served under section 21 of the Housing Act 1988 (HA 1988). There are a great many other issues that affect the potential validity of a notice under HA 1988, s 21 which are beyond the scope of this Q&A. HA 1988, s 21A was inserted by section 38 of the Deregulation Act 2015 which applies to all tenancies granted after 1 October 2015. HA 1988, s 21A requires landlords to comply with ‘prescribed requirements’ in order to validly serve a notice under HA 1988, s 21. HA 1988, s 21A states: ‘…(1) A notice under subsection (1) or (4) of section 21 may not be given in relation to

We have assumed that this query relates to an 'old tenancy' (ie pre-1 January 1996) on the basis of the reference to the tenant remaining liable under privity of contract. At common law, the original tenant remains liable under an 'old tenancy' for the tenant covenants throughout the term of the lease, even if it has assigned its interest (privity of contract) (Baynton v Morgan and Warnford Investments Ltd v Duckworth). A landlord may recover 'fixed charges' from a former tenant or its guarantor