Freeholder Demanding Subletting Fee

[dab1]

I have a buy-to let flat in Wigan. I bought it built new in 2008 and has been let on an Assured Shorthold Tenancy agreement from day one. After so many years of letting the property, I suddenly received an email from the free holder of the block of flats demanding a fee of £75 to receive a Notice of Sublet from me. They say this is in the terms of the lease, and they quote below the said terms: -

37 (b) Upon every underletting of the Property and upon every assignment transfer or charge thereof and upon the grant of probate of letters of administration affecting the Term and upon the devolution of any such term under any assent or other instrument or otherwise howsoever or by any Order of the Court within one month thereafter to give to the landlord or its Solicitors for the time being notice in writing of such underletting assignment transfer charge grant assent or Order with full particulars thereof and to produce to the Landlord or its Solicitors every such document as aforesaid and to pay to the Landlord save in the case of an Assured Shorthold Tenancy a reasonable fee (not to be less than £50.00 plus VAT) for the registration of the said notice and to deliver to the Landlord the deed of covenant referred to in Paragraph 39 of this schedule duly stamped

I pointed out that under this term of the lease agreement I am not required to pay a Notice Fee as the tenant signed AST agreement about two years ago. But they are still insisting.

My question is, what is the legal meaning of 'save' in the sentence 'save in the case of an Assured Shorthold Tenancy'?

[atticus]

The words "save in the case of" signify an exception. The obligation to pay a registration fee does not apply if the underletting is on an AST. Explain this to the freeholder.

[dab1]

Thank you, it is what I thought. I did point this out to them.

Are they trying to take advantage that AST agreements are now banned and so the term 'save in the case of an Assured Shorthold Tenancy' no longer applies? All existing AST agreements will become Assured Periodic Tenancies. Where does the law stand if a 2008 lease agreement mentions AST?

[atticus]

Maybe someone else with a greater understanding of the Renters Rights Act can comment, please.