It is common practice with some letting agents to create a new fixed term AST at the end of an initial AST by importing terms (i.e. both parties do not wish the tenancy to become periodic).
One could either
a) start afresh with a completely new AST (start date, end date, all terms)
b) have a one pager which says : New start date, New end date, we carry over all terms from previous agreement X, and we add or subtract the following couple of terms. The agreement is signed and agreed by the parties.
The question is whether (b) has exactly the same force as (a) and is effectively the same as reiterating the whole agreement.
Do all terms of any contract (whether a tenancy agreement or otherwise) have to be within that contract - it seems to me that if any contract imports terms which exists within a clearly and unambiguously defined external document, that the effect is identical to having included those terms within the document. The reason I am asking is that there seems to be disagreement on another forum, and I thought I would assess the views of folks over here.
One could either
a) start afresh with a completely new AST (start date, end date, all terms)
b) have a one pager which says : New start date, New end date, we carry over all terms from previous agreement X, and we add or subtract the following couple of terms. The agreement is signed and agreed by the parties.
The question is whether (b) has exactly the same force as (a) and is effectively the same as reiterating the whole agreement.
Do all terms of any contract (whether a tenancy agreement or otherwise) have to be within that contract - it seems to me that if any contract imports terms which exists within a clearly and unambiguously defined external document, that the effect is identical to having included those terms within the document. The reason I am asking is that there seems to be disagreement on another forum, and I thought I would assess the views of folks over here.
Comment