Tweet
Landlord Agrees to let a house, two acres of agricultural holding and a garden, I offer deposit and two months in advance by email, landlord agrees and informs me that I can move in any time I like. When I actually move in the landlord arrives and produces a document of standard terms which I sign promptly. The land is not mentioned in any of the standard terms.. my contention follows: Do I stand a chance?
section54 of the Law of Property Actstates specifically that no deed is necessary Inorder for a tenancy agreement to exist. Inorder for a tenancy agreement to exist it must have three essentialelements;
Ifthese three elements exist then a tenancy agreement is created. This contract is binding on all parties involved. Youcan avoid this by adding the words ‘Subjectto Contract’ onany correspondenceconcerning the core agreement.
CORETERMS
Termsin a tenancy agreement stating the rent, the details of the property,and the length of the tenancy are core terms. Core terms are termsthat are expressed or presented in such a way that they are, or atleast are capable of being, at the forefront of the parties mind indeciding whether to enter the agreement. For example, terms that setthe price or describe the main subject matter of the contract.
STANDARDTERMS
Standardterms are terms that have not been individually negotiated.
Standardterms will only be effective if they have been properly incorporatedinto the contract between the two parties.
Regulationsapply a test of fairness to most standard terms (terms that have notbeen individually negotiated) in contracts used by businesses withconsumers. (The test does not apply to core terms that set the priceor describe the main subject matter of the contract. )
Theterms must not put either party in a disadvantageous position, enableone party to change terms unilaterally without a valid reason orirrevocably bind a party to terms with which they have had no time tobecome familiar. An unfair term is not valid in law and cannot beenforced.
Thus,regulation 5 (1) provides that a standard term is unfair 'if,contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significantimbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under thecontract, to the detriment of the consumer'.
Thiswould include any term that deprives a party of a right which theyalready enjoy. Specifically in the case before us, the right tooccupy as the tenant to invest in and improve a business establishedon agricultural land in excess of two acres and let with a house.
However,this is a situation which the housing act 1988, as amended, makesspecific provisions for, since it is an arrangement that is quitewithout the scope of the six months short hold tenancy agreement.
Thusit would seem fair to maintain that the whole contract consisting ofstandard terms, not negotiated with me, that was unilaterally imposedupon me, after the fact, is unfair in relation to consumer law andimpractical in relation to the 1988 housing act, as amended, andcannot therefore be the valid subject of a section 21 applicationtoday.
section54 of the Law of Property Actstates specifically that no deed is necessary Inorder for a tenancy agreement to exist. Inorder for a tenancy agreement to exist it must have three essentialelements;
- an offer
- an acceptance of the offer
- some payment – known as the legal term consideration
Ifthese three elements exist then a tenancy agreement is created. This contract is binding on all parties involved. Youcan avoid this by adding the words ‘Subjectto Contract’ onany correspondenceconcerning the core agreement.
CORETERMS
Termsin a tenancy agreement stating the rent, the details of the property,and the length of the tenancy are core terms. Core terms are termsthat are expressed or presented in such a way that they are, or atleast are capable of being, at the forefront of the parties mind indeciding whether to enter the agreement. For example, terms that setthe price or describe the main subject matter of the contract.
STANDARDTERMS
Standardterms are terms that have not been individually negotiated.
Standardterms will only be effective if they have been properly incorporatedinto the contract between the two parties.
Regulationsapply a test of fairness to most standard terms (terms that have notbeen individually negotiated) in contracts used by businesses withconsumers. (The test does not apply to core terms that set the priceor describe the main subject matter of the contract. )
Theterms must not put either party in a disadvantageous position, enableone party to change terms unilaterally without a valid reason orirrevocably bind a party to terms with which they have had no time tobecome familiar. An unfair term is not valid in law and cannot beenforced.
Thus,regulation 5 (1) provides that a standard term is unfair 'if,contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significantimbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under thecontract, to the detriment of the consumer'.
Thiswould include any term that deprives a party of a right which theyalready enjoy. Specifically in the case before us, the right tooccupy as the tenant to invest in and improve a business establishedon agricultural land in excess of two acres and let with a house.
However,this is a situation which the housing act 1988, as amended, makesspecific provisions for, since it is an arrangement that is quitewithout the scope of the six months short hold tenancy agreement.
Thusit would seem fair to maintain that the whole contract consisting ofstandard terms, not negotiated with me, that was unilaterally imposedupon me, after the fact, is unfair in relation to consumer law andimpractical in relation to the 1988 housing act, as amended, andcannot therefore be the valid subject of a section 21 applicationtoday.
