• Home
  • About
  • Clinic
  • Training
  • Tenants
  • Landlord Law

The Landlord Law Blog

From landlord and tenant lawyer Tessa Shepperson

  • Home
  • Posts
  • News & comment
  • Cases
  • Tenants
    • The Renters Guide Website
    • 15 Places for tenant help
  • Clinic
  • Series
    • Analysis
    • should law and justice be free
    • HMO Basics
    • Tenancy Agreements 33 days
    • Airbnb
    • Grounds for Eviction
    • Tips

Landlord and tenant law – implied surrender explained

August 11, 2010 by Tessa J Shepperson

HousesImplied surrender/ surrender by operation of law – what is it?

Implied surrender (which I mentioned also here) is a useful rule in landlord and tenant law.

In most cases if a tenant fails to give up possession of a property, the landlord has to get a court order before he can re-take the property (and even then he has to use the court bailiffs if the tenant still doesn’t go).  However there are a few occasions when the landlord can re-take possession without having to go through the court procedure.  This is when there is an ‘implied surrender’.

Implied surrender is when the landlord and tenants conduct is inconsistent with an intention to continue with the tenancy.  It is ‘implied’ because you have to work it out from the conduct of the parties.  As opposed to an express surrender, where you generally have a deed setting out what was agreed, so you know.

There is an interesting case report in Legal Action Magazine, called Sable v. QFS Scaffolding Ltd (actually a commercial case regarding a builders yard) where the Judge made some helpful comments.  As these principles will no doubt also apply to residential cases, I thought it would be helpful to take a look at them here.

Implied surrender and surrender by operation of law

These are two phrases which are both used in similar circumstances. The Judge confirmed in the case that they are in fact both the same thing.

Its not what the parties intend which is important but what they actually do

So if the tenant fails to pay rent, moves all her belongings out of the property and leaves the keys behind, she cannot complain if the landlord goes in and changes the locks.  Her actions are not consistent with those of someone who wants to continue being a tenant.

That is the most common situation, but there can be others.  Whether the circumstances are sufficient to show that the tenancy has been surrendered will depend on the facts.  Here are some quotations from the judgment :

  • ‘the conduct of the parties must unequivocally amount to an acceptance that the tenancy has ended’
  • ‘there must be either a relinquishment of possession and its acceptance by the landlord, or other conduct consistent only with the cesser of the tenancy’
  • ‘the circumstances must be such as to render it inequitable for the landlord or the tenant to dispute that the tenancy has ended’
  • ‘Where the conduct of a party is inconsistent with the continuation of the tenancy, that party is estopped from contending that the tenancy subsists’
  • ‘where both parties act on the basis that the tenancy has ended, the result will be that the tenancy has ended’

Although intention is important, its not what their intention actually was (ie what thoughts were in their head) but what their actions showed to be their intention.  Which is different.

Landlord and tenant law – the time of surrender

Another interesting point is about the time of the surrender:

the surrender is treated as having taken place immediately before the act to which the landlord or the tenant is a party;

Which reinforces my view in my urban myths post that abandonment notices are unnecessary.

What is your view? Have you come across any interesting example of implied surrender?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Filed Under: Analysis Tagged With: abandonment, unlawful eviction

Scroll down for the comments

IMPORTANT: Please check the date of the post above - remember, if it is an old post, the law may have changed since it was written.

You should always get independent legal advice before taking any action.

Notes on comments:

For personal landlord and tenant related problems, please use our >> Blog Clinic.
Note that we do not publish all comments, please >> click here to read our terms of use and comments policy. Comments close after three months.

Keep up with the news on Landlord Law blog!

To get posts sent direct to your email in box click here

About Tessa J Shepperson

Tessa is a specialist landlord & tenant lawyer and the creator of this site! She is a director of Landlord Law Services which runs Landlord Law and Easy Law Training.

« Kalayaan – Charity of the month (August)
Tessa on the BBC – and a problem with a tenant who won’t move out »

Comments

  1. Yonnette Roberts says

    May 5, 2011 at 10:13 AM

    Very interesting reading I work for LA and I have a number of cases where tenants have claimed to have moved into a property, signed on for HB and then the landlord never hear from them again. No rent is paid apart from the deposit and first months rent. In these cases I have been telling landlords to use the abandonment notices process. I am not sure where this process came from but it appears to give a common sense approach for a defence. (Landlords are told of the offence if the tenant does return) however, it have never been tested in court and I have never had any come back from the tenants. Interestingly I would take Civic action against a landlord if he/she did evict a tenant without a Court order where evidence supports this. I will now do some research on the matter. thanks

  2. Tessa Shepperson says

    May 5, 2011 at 10:25 AM

    Hi Yonnette, thanks for your comment. It is interesting to hear about the tenants HB scam (as I presume it is).

    I have always suspected that the abandonment notices came from landlords’ reluctance to use the courts to get a possession order. Understandable I suppose in view of the cost and time. Much easier and cheaper to slap a notice on the door.

    However to the best of my knowledge, an abandonment notice will not be a satisfacatory defence to a tenant for a civil claim for damages for unlawful eviction. The landlords best defence here is implied surrender.

    An abandonment notice may be a defence to a criminal prosecution for unlawful eviction though, which would normally be brought by the LA. However I don’t think these are done very often. What is your experience?

  3. westminster says

    May 7, 2011 at 2:26 PM

    “the surrender is treated as having taken place immediately before the act to which the landlord or the tenant is a party”

    Would you clarify what this means? I’m struggling!

  4. Tessa Shepperson says

    May 7, 2011 at 2:31 PM

    My understanding of this is that it will normally be the act of re-entering the property.

  5. westminster says

    May 7, 2011 at 4:52 PM

    That’s what I suspected but it mentions the tenant, too. Can’t see how a surrender could take place ‘before the act to which the tenant is a party’, assuming that act must be the offer to surrender (e.g. vacating etc)? *baffled*

  6. Tessa Shepperson says

    May 8, 2011 at 2:03 PM

    The answer will be in the case report – I know I read it at the time but did not express it very well. The case report is here http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/682.html

    Note that the case was not a residential situation which is why some of the quotes sound odd in a residential landlord and tenant context.

  7. Rose Anderson says

    May 8, 2011 at 3:08 PM

    I have a tenant who has informed LA that he has moved out so they now want council tax from me. The tenant is not living at the property and has stolen all the furniture and white goods.
    He still has the keys and we have no way of contacting him. Is this implied surrender?

  8. Tessa Shepperson says

    May 9, 2011 at 8:47 AM

    It sounds like it. If they have nicked all your stuff they are not likley to sue you for compensation anyway – you would have a counterclaim for the loss of your property.

    However note that I can’t give ‘advice’ just general tips. Please see the disclaimer in the footer below.

  9. Rose Anderson says

    May 9, 2011 at 11:15 AM

    Thanks for your fast reply. It is spot on I talked to my solicitor who specialises in property law and he says the same thing.
    I won,t get the rent arrears back too costly to pursue, but police investigation the theft of the goods can find out where the ex tenant has moved too under section 35 of the dpa.
    Even if I do not get the goods back I take comfort from the fact they will not get off scot free.
    I also suspect these rogue tenants to be what is generally called professional tenants and they will just keep moving on to the next unsuspecting landlord.

“Interesting posts on residential landlord & tenant law and practice - in England & Wales UK”

Subscribe to the Landlord Law Blog by email

Never miss another post!

Sign up to our
>> daily updates

If you are new to the blog >> click here

Get Your Free Ebook:

Click to get your Free Ebook

>> Click Here for Your Free Copy

Featured Post

Tessa Shepperson

Why you need and how to get proper legal advice on landlord and tenant issues

Tessa’s Podcast

The Landlord and Lawyer Podcast

Worried about Insurance?

Landlord Law Insurance Mini-Course

Disclaimer

The purpose of this blog is to provide information, comment and discussion.

Although Tessa, or guest bloggers, may from time to time, give helpful comments to readers' questions, these can only be based on the information given by the reader in his or her comment, which may not contain all material facts.

Any comments or suggestions provided by Tessa or any guest bloggers should not, therefore be relied upon as a substitute for legal advice from a qualified lawyer regarding any actual legal issue or dispute.

Nothing on this website should be construed as legal advice or perceived as creating a lawyer-client relationship (apart from the Fast Track block clinic service - so far as the questioners only are concerned).

Please also note that any opinion expressed by a guest blogger is his or hers alone, and does not necessarily reflect the views of Tessa Shepperson, or the other writers on this blog.

Cookies

You can find out more about our use of 'cookies' on this website here.

Associated sites

Landlord Law Services
The Renters Guide
Eco Landlords
Your Law Store

Legal

Landlord Law Blog is © 2006 – 2021 Tessa Shepperson.

Note that Tessa is an introducer for Alan Boswell Insurance Brokers and will get a commission from sales made via links on this website.

© 2006–2022 Tessa Shepperson | Rainmaker Platform | Contact Page | Privacy | Log in

This website or its third-party tools use cookies which are necessary to its functioning and required to improve your experience. By clicking the consent button, you agree to allow the site to use, collect and/or store cookies.
I accept