verbal lease terminated please help

[daveashton]

Hi

one of my clients has a verbal lease that started on the 5th of October 2011. at the end of March this year a new lease was offered that they requested should be signed for on the 1st of april 2012.

The lease had many problems and was hence under negotiation which to far my client was having issues with as the property owners insisted that he speak to their solicitors about the matter and that he would incur the cost for this!

Today he has been given notice by recorded delivery to leave the building on the 5th of October.

As part of the current verbal agreement he was allowed to use the area around the side and back of the building and this was excluded in the new version hence he could not stay even if he wanted to as this is vital for the business

questions:

1: is the notice period long enough as he needs more time to find a new premises?
2: can the force a change of what is included in the lease knowing this would force him out?

Thanks in advance

Dave

 

[kulture]

Was he paying rent monthly or quarterly?

 

[Maxwell83]

A 'verbal' lease? As in nothing documented on paper?

 

[kulture]

It is important to know the frequency of paying as that will help determine the notice period.

 

[Maxwell83]

You are thinking in terms of a periodic tenancy, but if thats what he has and its a business premises, he will be protected by the security of tenure provisions in the LTA 1954. The notice would be subject to the provisions of the act and he can demand a new tenancy on the same terms - and importantly for the same demise.

 

[daveashton]

Hi

it is a business premiss and he pays monthly in advance. What makes me pissed off is the changes they want mean my client can not sign the lease i.e. he is being forced out.

You are thinking in terms of a periodic tenancy, but if thats what he has and its a business premises, he will be protected by the security of tenure provisions in the LTA 1954. The notice would be subject to the provisions of the act and he can demand a new tenancy on the same terms - and importantly for the same demise.

is this what we have?