how long is four weeks?
In the case of Chesterfield BC v Bailey, a joint
tenancy was granted to Mr and Mrs B in 2002. In 2005 the marriage
broke down and Mr B moved out. In 2010 Mr B received a letter from
C, informing him that he was liable for arrears of rent. As a
consequence of this, he went to the offices of C and was advised
that his only way of avoiding any future liability for rent was to
have his name"taken off" the tenancy. He then signed, on 6
September 2010, a notice to quit. After it expired, the Council
sought possession.
The tenancy agreement specified that a notice must
give four full weeks notice in writing, "to expire on a Monday
at midday if you wish to end your tenancy". The claim was
dismissed. The judge decided that the notice to quit was defective
because the Council could not show that the notice, given on 6
September 2010, and expressed to expire on Monday 4 October 2010,
(28 days later), had been received before 12 noon on 6 September
2010 and therefore failed to establish that four full weeks' notice
had been given.
The judge also decided that, even if the notice had been valid,
it would not have been proportionate to make a possession order
having regard to the defendant's rights under Human Rights Act 1998
Schedule 1 Article 8.
what this means for social landlords
The Council came unstuck in this case because of the wording of
its own tenancy agreement. If it had not required a notice to
expire at midday, (as is common), the notice would have been
valid.
