Tweet
Hi, I am seeking some clarity on my position with regards to a retail property that I signed a Licence To Occupy 22 months ago, please see photos attached.
I have paid the specified rent for the past 22 months and all payments are up to date.
I am in possession of the only 2 sets of keys for the premises, the landlord does not have any keys to access the property.
While the contract in the photos says that what I have signed is a licence, does the fact that the landlord cannot access the property without me being there and that I have paid the rent for the past 22 months mean that what I actually have is not a licence but rather a lease or tenancy, irrespective of what the contract states.
The reason I need some clarification on this issue is that the landlord has recently let me know that he needs to double the rent and issue a new licence. With business being bad at the moment I cannot afford to pay the new rent, but I need more than the specified 4 weeks or even immediate termination mentioned in the licence to clear the property.
I have paid the specified rent for the past 22 months and all payments are up to date.
I am in possession of the only 2 sets of keys for the premises, the landlord does not have any keys to access the property.
While the contract in the photos says that what I have signed is a licence, does the fact that the landlord cannot access the property without me being there and that I have paid the rent for the past 22 months mean that what I actually have is not a licence but rather a lease or tenancy, irrespective of what the contract states.
The reason I need some clarification on this issue is that the landlord has recently let me know that he needs to double the rent and issue a new licence. With business being bad at the moment I cannot afford to pay the new rent, but I need more than the specified 4 weeks or even immediate termination mentioned in the licence to clear the property.
