Thanks for picking this up - continuation from previous thread.
I wrote pretty much as you suggested, and received the reply that the landlord had contacted the letting agent to arrange for new viewings.
(Do you need to read these? - I can copy the text in if you felt it best and didn't mind).
As a first point:
You mentioned before that the landlord has a duty to mitigate his loss ( I hope this is the case) - by attempting to re-let at the same price?
The rent increased just over two months ago (when I re-signed) by £25 to £500 / week. I have just noticed that the flat is back with the agent at £540 / week.
Can I take issue with this? I.e. that I shouldn't have to subsidise the landlord attempting to make a profit rather than mitigate loss and so potentially missing out of prospective tenants at replacement cost?
I'm not sure what you mean "if he tries to take the money from you".I'm not sure why he can increase the rent... if he accepted an increase to £500/week two months prior, and has a duty to mitigate his loss, then shouldn't he try for the same price in order to maximise the chances of finding a replacement?Could you tell me what the worst case scenario is reasonably likely to be?What is my best course of action?Thanks.
On the previous thread you wrote:
He would have to prove he had looked to find a replacement at the existing rent and could not find out which is hard to do.If he could do that then you would be liable but that isn't going to happen.
so I'm confused why you say now that he can increase the rent.
You had previously written (on the other thread):
"the landlord is under a duty to mitigate his loss by seeking a replacement and usually he is expected to achieve that within one to two months."
"He would have to prove he had looked to find a replacement at the existing rent and could not find out which is hard to do.If he could do that then you would be liable but that isn't going to happen."
I'm saying, based on what you said previously, he should not be able to increase the rent and continue to hold be liable if he is under a duty to mitigate his loss - because increasing the rent is not mitigating loss but seeking profit (potentially at my expense if it puts of prospective tenants).
And, that if he has increased the rent then he could not prove he had looked to find a replacement at the existing rent - which you said he would need to do in order for me to remain liable.
Could you have a think about this, because it seems I may not be explaining my logic based on your previous answers well enough.
so you think that the landlord increasing the rent by 8% two months after having accepted another year's rent at 5% increase is consistent with your previous answer:
"He would have to prove he had looked to find a replacement at the existing rent and could not find out which is hard to do."
I don't see how that is looking to find a replacement AT THE EXISTING RENT, as you previously wrote.
Could you address that point specifically please? At no point was never increasing the rent mentioned.
You're copying and pasting your answers which I find arrogant.
Can you admit that you are contradicting your previous answer:
Increasing the rent is not "at the existing rent". Do you understand this?
Very well. Thank you for that clarification. Perhaps I took you previous statement too literally when you wrote "find a replacement at the existing rent".
I previously asked:
"Is there any advantage of offering to make up the difference between current rent and prospective rent (to make it easier to find a replacement)."
And you replied:
"I wouldn't make that offer. It just opens up a can of worms. He will replace you fairly easily within a month unless the house is literally falling apart."
Is it still unwise to make that offer? I might work out far more economical in the long run than the landlord pushing for top price safe in the knowledge that I'll continue to be liable? That's a free option for the landlord. There's no downside in trying to get lucky by asking an unreasonably high rent.
The flat is in reasonable condition and about 10 minutes walk from St Pauls, so I have trusted your comment that he should replace me fairly easily.
If this does not happen, what would be the best way to proceed?
How many more months rent should I pay before stopping paying and being prepared to be taken to court (if that is the worst case likely outcome)?
ok, thank you. Just a few more questions:
Allowing disrepair would not be one. Perhaps it could be argued that if the rent went up 5% two months ago and was accepted for a year, why is it now being marketed at an 8% rise. That must potentially put off some potential tenants.
Would it disadvantage me to point this out to the landlord?
If you think it would not disadvantage me, I will pay for one month after from the 1st business day after I gave notice. Maybe that will encourage him to lower the rent back to what he accepted from me.
Should I give notice of my intention to cease to pay, or simply cease?
If I were sued, and a judgement were made against me, would I be allowed to pay in installments?
Although I paid for a carpet steam clean, he has claimed that the carpets need another clean. Would it disadvantage me to offer to pay for this cleaning as a gesture of goodwill?
Lastly, he has claimed that one of the four chairs has been damaged (which I would not agree with) and that he has ordered a replacement set.
Is it a good idea to ask for the checkout agent to visit the property to make an assessment against my deposit for two years of fair wear and tear, rather than agree with the landlord buying new things?
(I will rate this as excellent and release the funds when this concludes).
I received the below. Should I request that no work be done and nothing be bought under the presumption that the cost will need to be deducted from the deposit until a checkout agent has visited?
Paul has been around today and will return tomorrow with tools. There are a number of marks on the walls in the flat and Paul will try his best to clean or touch up most. The lounge room however will need to be painted as there are a substantial number of large marks in that room. The cost of painting that room will need to be deducted from the deposit. I will ask Paul for a price.
I can take them. I'm still living in the flat (for now).