Assured shorthold tenancy converted into assured tenancy in error

Date Added: 13 January 2012

To gain possession in the case of an Assured Shorthold Tenancy (AST), the landlord must serve a notice on the tenant giving the tenant at least two months' notice that the landlord requires possession (section 21, HA 1988).

As long as the landlord has correctly served this notice, the court must order possession. With an assured tenancy, however, the landlord will only obtain a court order for possession if the landlord follows the correct procedure and can establish one or more or the grounds for possession set out in Schedule 2 to the HA 1988.

 In the recent decision of Saxon Weald Homes Limited v Chadwick [2011] EWCA Civ 1202, the Court of Appeal held that a letter sent in error by the landlord's employee constituted a notice under paragraph 2 of Schedule 2A to the Housing Act 1988, the effect of which was to convert the tenant's assured shorthold tenancy into an assured tenancy.

The tenant had been granted an AST for a probationary period of a year. The AST stated that if the tenant successfully completed the probationary period, the AST would be converted to an assured tenancy. The tenant breached the AST and the landlord sought possession of the property prior to the end of the probationary period. However, the landlord's housing manager was unaware of the landlord's steps to gain possession of the property and sent out a standard letter on the first anniversary of the date of the AST stating that the AST had been converted into an assured tenancy due to the tenant's successful completion of the probationary period. The district judge found in favour of the landlord and granted an order for possession. The tenant appealed to the county court judge, which found in favour of the tenant.

On appeal, the landlord tried to use the Mannai principle. It submitted that, given the background of the landlord's steps to gain possession of the property, a reasonable recipient would have doubted the meaning of the letter and consequently, the letter was insufficient as a notice. The Court of Appeal disagreed with the landlord and found in favour of the tenant. A tenant ordinarily was not to be expected to enquire into, or think about, a landlord's reasons for serving an otherwise unambiguous notice in connection with a lease.

Landlords or their agents should ensure they have effective procedures in place to enable them to communicate with their tenants and avoid similar errors. For further information please speak to Mark Dewey or our Property Litigation team.

<< Back to News