Ask an Property Solicitor. Get an Answer ASAP.
A tenant was introduced by a letting agent. Both landlord and tenant have signed the tenancy agreement. The landlord has not received any rent and no deposit was paid on moving in day. On moving in day the tenant refused to move in because the flat was not painted. Now the tenant wants to move in and says he wants to paint the flat himself. The landlord now does not want the tenant or the tenant to move in. What happens?
This rental is 6 months rent in advance and no deposit and the letting agent is holding the money.
Hello, welcome to the website. My name is Tony, I can assist you with this.
Was painting a pre-condition to the tenant agreeing?
It was agree for a professional clean that did take place. It was agreed to mend the sliding patio door which was done. From the letting agent it was marks on the kitchen wall and ceiling to be done not a full paint.
Did you say you would not move in unless the clean was done?
Or do you think it was clear that it meant that, whatever you agreed?
this is what was stated by the letting agent:-
Or rather, did the tenant say he would not move in etc?
Congratulations on securing the offer as follows:
I assume you're the landlord?
Okay. Then if you have no agreement effective, because you had to paint, then no tenancy would have been created.
yes the tenant said he would not move in and gave him an ultimatum accept it "as is" or lose the flat
However, if this was not framed as an essential pre-condition to the agreement becoming effective, then you're likely to have a tenancy and you might be in breach of the agreement you reached by not letting the tenant take possession.
I gave him an ultimatum
how do you mean framed as a pre-condition?
Basically, you would have to say something like "before any contract comes into force between us, I must paint the house, and if I don't do that, there is no agreement". or words to that effect.
so the letting agent said repaint stains in kitchen - which I never answered
It sounds to me like it's a normal agreement, not a pre-condition, so it sounds like there might be an obligation on you to let him in.
If you don't then he would need to find somewhere else, and he is under a duty to try and find somewhere else at the same price etc. So in reality, there is probably little financial loss to him and hence, little or no claim against you.
ok I dont understand on one hand you say its not a pre-condition and i might be obliged to let him in on the other hand you are saying he has not lost any money so no claim but he would lose the fees he's paid to the letting agent
If it's a pre-condition - no claim.
If it's not a pre-condition and you don't let him in, then he is unlikely to have a claim because he can find somewhere else arguably at the same cost.
I was addressing both positions for you.
Is there anything you would like me to clarify more for you?
I will now write to the letting agent to state:- There was no pre-condition in writing framed that I was to paint the marks in the kitchen before the tenancy started therefore I am not letting this applicant go ahead with this property. He will easily be able to find a similar flat in the same block or blocks at the same or similar price.
Yes, fair enough. Is there anything more you want me to help with?
thats fine thanks
please remember to rate the answer for me.