Ask a Law Question, Get an Answer ASAP!
Thanks for your patience and enquiry. Your situation really is not a straight forward one at all. The first issue of concern is with respect to the notice you sent. You unfortunately could no send this notice as you were not the one who placed him in possession of the property. You are not his landlord. As such, the only person who could have served him notice is he previous landlord.
As it stands therefore, the notice you gave is void and he really does not have to move.
The onus would be on the landlord to have him removed from the property.
It seems you have now enter into another fixed term contact. You cannot jus simply say it is void by virtue of you not having sole possession unless the contract specifically provides for this. To exit this new contract you would have to give notice if the contras a break clause and then vacate the premises at the end.
Even if you had given the landlord notice to end the joint tenancy, that does not mean the other person has to move out. They would have to be removed from the property by the landlord.
Can I clarify anything for you? I hope I have answered your query in a way that is simple and easy to understand. If anything remains unclear, I will be more than happy to clarify it for you. In the meantime, thank you once again for using our services.
It depends on the wording of your contract whether you giving notice automatically ends the joint tenancy. In addition if you have given notice and remain in the property, it brings into question whether the notice was a proper notice to leave or simply means by which the contract may be frustrated.
Even if I were to accept what you say you have done in terms of giving notice. Then it goes back to the initial point that the onus would now be on the landlord to commence recovery proceedings.
The breach of quite enjoyment clause allows you to seek compensation and does not necessarily allows for you to move from the property u less the contract specifically allows for this.