• 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

My partner has walked out of our rented home – is he still liable for the rent?

June 13, 2017 by Tessa Shepperson

housesThis is a question to the blog clinic from Natalie (not her real name) who is a tenant.

Hi! I’m in an assured shorthold tenancy and 6 months has elapsed out of 12.

My partner unexpectedly walked out on me and is refusing to help with the costs of the house. I am also really not in a position to move (quite severe back injury).

He has signed himself off the lease, but has been informed he needs my signature so i can accept the role as lead tenant, as i am currently listed as tenant two.

It will take me a couple of months before I am literally back on my feet – is he liable to help with the rent if i don’t sign? If i do sign and become liable i’m almost certain I can’t make enough money on time. I’m currently on sick pay and housing benefit and have debts building fast just to cover basic expenses.

We borrowed £2500 from family during our stay here for house improvements and the deposit – he has offered 1200 gbp to be taken off the lease, but has since withdrawn that offer. Please help!

Answer

I am not sure exactly what you mean by saying that your partner has ‘signed himself off the lease’. Generally when you sign a tenancy you are liable under it for the rest of the term.

No changes can be done to the tenancy agreement without your consent as joint tenant.

I assume that the signature you are being asked to make is for a new tenancy as sole tenant. This is not in your interests to sign as once this is signed he will no longer be liable for the rent.

During the fixed term

If the tenancy remains unchanged then the landlord is entitled to claim rent from both you and your partner (even though he is no longer living at the property). Under a ‘joint and several’ tenancy, which you will have, you are both liable for the rent together and individually.

What this actually means is that the landlord, if he goes to court, can sue either both of you together or just one of you for the whole lot.

If you pay all the rent, you may be legally entitled to claim back any rent you paid the landlord over and above your ‘share’ from your former partner. But this would depend on what agreement you had reached with him in the first place (ie when you moved in) about paying the rent.

After the fixed term

When the fixed term of the tenancy has ended, then your former partner can serve a ‘Notice to Quit’ on the landlord which will end the tenancy completely and therefore effectively end his liability under it.

If you then stayed on and paid rent which was accepted by the landlord, a new tenancy would be created automatically under s54(2) of the Law of Property At 1925. However from then on you would be sole tenant and responsible for all the rent.

Note that if you are evicted you may, in view of your particular circumstances (in particular your back injury) be entitled to be re-housed by the Local Authority. You may want to approach them and have a word about it.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Filed Under: Readers problems

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 Shepperson

Tessa is a specialist landlord & tenant solicitor and the creator of this site! She is a director of Landlord Law Services which now hosts Landlord Law and other services for landlords and property professionals.

« Are you young? This election has shown you are powerful. So why stop there?
Tenancy Agreements 33 days of tips – day 23 – service of notices »

Comments

  1. Ben Reeve-Lewis says

    June 13, 2017 at 8:26 AM

    The Local Authority route is a very long shot Tessa I’m afraid. It would depend entirely upon the severity of the back problem and how it affected her abilities to cope if she were to be homeless and I note in there she said she expects to be back on her feet in a couple of months.

    Homelessness case workers would expect medical evidence in support and would also seek their own independent medical advice before making a decision.

    I’m curious to know why she spent £2,500 on home improvements in a rented home though.

    • Tessa Shepperson says

      June 13, 2017 at 8:57 AM

      Yes, but no harm in asking.

      Yes, I did wonder about commenting on th £2,500 improvements (although she says part of that is for the deposit).

      If anyone reading this is considering spending serious money doing up someone else’s property I suggest you read this first: http://www.landlordlaw.co.uk/horror/horror-story-they-told-me-i-could-stay-there-long-i-liked

  2. Ben Reeve-Lewis says

    June 13, 2017 at 9:39 AM

    I remember coming across a story back in 2013 where tenants David and Elaine Rolfe spent £20,000 and 11 years converting the two-acre plot of their rented ornate garden with sweeping flower beds and arbours, without the approval of their landlords. The garden was a labour of love and a beautiful improvement but the landlord demanded that the couple pay a £5,000 bill to have the garden dug up and covered with gravel at the end of the tenancy.

  3. Michael Barnes says

    June 14, 2017 at 2:11 PM

    Tessa,
    You wrote “When the fixed term of the tenancy has ended, then your former partner can serve a ‘Notice to Quit’ on the landlord which will end the tenancy completely and therefore effectively end his liability under it”.

    Does that mean that although a joint tenant has contracted for a fixed term, he cannot get out of the agreement for the term plus 2 months (because the HA 1988 says that notice served on or before first day of statutory periodic tenancy is invalid).

    Surely that cannot be correct?

  4. Lawcruncher says

    June 15, 2017 at 10:48 AM

    “Does that mean that although a joint tenant has contracted for a fixed term, he cannot get out of the agreement for the term plus 2 months (because the HA 1988 says that notice served on or before first day of statutory periodic tenancy is invalid).

    Surely that cannot be correct?”

    Assuming the statutory periodic tenancy is monthly, it is. The Act is set up (a) to prevent unscrupulous landlords from obtaining notices to quit from tenants when they sign up and (b) to ensure that a tenant under an assured tenancy has the right to continue in occupation when a fixed tenancy ends. Since the tenant(s) under the new tenancy is/are the tenant(s) at the end of the fixed term, the combined effect of provisions intended to protect tenants and the common law rules means that a joint tenant who has left is committed to two periods of the statutory periodic tenancy.

    The only way to avoid the problem is for the tenancy to be a “fixed term plus”, that is expressed to be for a fixed term and then to continue as a monthly (or whatever) tenancy. If that is done, there is no new tenancy when the fixed term expires and a notice to quit can be served to expire at the end of the first period immediately following the end of the fixed term. Note though that a fixed term plus is a tenancy for a minimum term equal to the fixed term plus one period.

    • Michael Barnes says

      June 16, 2017 at 1:10 PM

      But S5(2) says “the tenant shall be entitled to remain in possession” (has the right in your words), not “shall be obliged”, which seems to mean that the tenant has to exercise that right.
      S45(3) says that in a joint tenancy “tenant” means all of the individuals.

      That suggests that all the individuals have to exercise the right to a statutory periodic tenancy for oen to arise, and as a corollary, if one individual chooses not to exercise that right, then no statutory periodic tenancy arises.

    • Michael Barnes says

      June 16, 2017 at 6:11 PM

      Also, your comment on “fixed term plus” does not seem reasonable.

      It implies that in a 12 month tenancy that then continues annually, an individual in a joint tenancy is bound to at least 2 years if the other joint tenant does not wish to leave at the end of the first year.

      In the House of Lords judgement in the case of “Mayor etc. of the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham (Respondents) v. Monk (A.P.) (Appellant)”, Lord Bridge wrote

      “Hence, in any ordinary
      agreement for an initial term which is to continue for successive
      terms unless determined by notice, the obvious inference is that
      the agreement is intended to continue beyond the initial term only
      if and so long as all parties to the agreement are willing that it
      should do so. In a common law situation, where parties are free
      to contract as they wish and are bound only so far as they have
      agreed to be bound, this leads to the only sensible result.

      Thus the application of ordinary contractual principles leads
      me to expect that a periodic tenancy granted to two or more joint
      tenants must be terminable at common law by an appropriate
      notice to quit given by any one of them whether or not the others
      are prepared to concur. But I turn now to the authorities to see
      whether there is any principle of the English Law of real property
      and peculiar to the contractual relationship of landlord and tenant
      which refutes that expectation or whether the authorities confirm
      it.”

      As far as I can see in that judgement, he found nothing to refute the expectation.
      There may, of course, be other judgements or statute that confirm your statement.

  5. Lawcruncher says

    June 17, 2017 at 8:50 AM

    Section 5 is clear that the periodic tenancy arises by virtue of the section. If all the statutory conditions are fulfilled, the new tenancy arises automatically. There is no requirement for the tenant to make an election; if there were the Act would say so and set out the procedure.

    By “fixed term plus” (not a recognised term, hence the quote marks) I refer to a tenancy granted in terms such as “for the period of one year and then continuing as a monthly tenancy”. So long as the wording is clear, the tenancy will continue and the periods will be whatever the parties have agreed.

    The judgement you quote is relevant to how periodic tenancies, whether contractual or statutory, may be ended by one of two or more joint tenants, but does not deal with the effect of section 5. The position of a joint tenant under a fixed term assured tenancy who has left is unfortunate and is not addressed by the Act.

“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