Singing Pig

clottie:

""its about seizing the initiative.""

 

sorry to be blunt - its nothing of the sort - its about you not knowing what you are doing !!!!

 

obviously someone attended the rita slag school of grammar!!! oops

its about asking about it   to be certain and getting a sensible reply as from david a.

if the tenant verbally says he will leave in a casual conversation then no clottie, its not about me waiting for him to give a 1-month's notice, which he may not give and all the uncertainty associated with it. its about serving a s21 and getting 2-months (not 1-month) to find a suitable tenant!!! oops.

maybe clottie you will cite where I have been incorrect in law? 

there is something very odd going on here    -  my PC screen while here viewing  SP shows me that Dobbie posted the original post  - and yet DavidA is referring to/quoting  Darkstar and yet my inbox tells me that Darkstar has posted me a response reply to this thread - but i cannot see a Darkstar  - is Dobbie/Darkstar the same person ?

Haha

My eyes are playing tricks too. When I first read this thread, I thought "clottie" and "dottie" - whoops: "dobbie" - were the same person

I'm utterly unmistakeable James !!!  

btw - whose Rita ???? 

its darkstar, but for some reason it shows up as dobbie, though my joining date is correct. maybe sp admin can explain why. could it be some software glitch on your side sp admin?

"rita slag" is a grammar style with the over use of exclamation marks for effect, but through its very overuse it loses effect!!!!!! I thought it was widely known. It predates the "vicky pollard" style by 15 or 20 years.

 

You can adjust the name that is shown in your profile settings.

Regards

Fearghas 

clottie:

""The act of parting with keys is a physical act recognised in law as parting with possession."

 
do you perhaps  have a legal Act, case law, whatever to justify this as it would be MOST useful for a client at the moment if we could quote chapter and verse for "keys" being the final act of  handing back to the LL.

This AFAIK is one of those areas that come under common law there is no specific law or case that specifies this. However, If you read the link I gave above to Laine -v- Cadwallader, I think you will see what I mean. In this case, the Judge simply works on the premise that keys being put through the letterbox was the offer to surrender, a matter of fact act that gave a significant point in time to the conclusion he gave.

David A:

You need to get him to do this in writing, the reason is below.

First you need to issue a s21 notice. This has to be served before 13 July. It should state that you require possession after 13 September. Get the dates wrong and the notice is invalid.

David,

I am interested in cases where the Section 21 becomes invalid. In the above example what would happen if the Landlord’s s21 notice states that they need possession after the 12th of September? My thinking is that if the tenancy started on 13th Sept then it ends on possibly 12th Sept.

So if the s21 states something like the following, would it be valid or invalid?

“We require possession of X

After 12th September OR after the last day of the period of your tenancy which expires next after the end of two months from the date of service of this notice to you.”

My second question is: What happens if the landlord does nothing after the notice expires?

I have a situation where a pain-in-the-x tenant wants to be re-housed by the council and wants me to start court proceedings to enable her. I have told her I have no intentions of going through that process currently, and I might be inclined to consider it only if she is willing to bear the cost. Hence, I haven’t done anything since the s21 notice expired on 21st April (hopefully the s21 was correct & valid for a tenancy that started on 22nd April?).

If so, how long does a Landlord have after the expiration of an s21 to bring about eviction proceedings?

Thanks in advance.