Early tenancy ending

[terrontress]

I have a property which we let out five months ago on a twelve month tenancy agreement.

The tenant has contacted me after five months and advised he wants to end the tenancy.

I have advertised the property on DAFT and the current tenant showed the property to prospective tenants when they called round.

In getting the current tenant in I had to undergo a bit of expense in getting to the apartment to meet him and get the lease signed as we live out of the country. In addition we had to pay to register the tenancy with the PRTB and finally, we had it cleaned. The tenant assured us that he intended to stay for a long time and the property was ideal for his purposes so in my head I divided those costs by a long and happy tenancy. He is a civil servant and still in his job so I presume his financial circumstances have not changed massively since the spring.

I know that where I live is absolutely none of his concern. He has done me a favour by showing it to prospective tenants without my being there. His rent has been paid on time and he seemed a decent sort when I met him.

Am I within my rights, and is it fair and decent, to withhold all or part of his deposit based on costs incurred by us and the fact he has broken the terms of the lease.

I am fairly annoyed with him but no point in making him stay. Where I live I could force him to stay and take legal action for the remainder of the value of the lease whether he is there or not.

Thoughts appreciated
tt.

 

[facetious]

I have a property which we let out five months ago on a twelve month tenancy agreement.

The tenant has contacted me after five months and advised he wants to end the tenancy.

A tenant in a fixed term agreement is permitted, with the permission of the landlord, to assign the remainder of the lease to another person acceptable to the landlord. In this case he is entitled to the return of his deposit as he would be if the landlord's permission was denied. Unfortunately, landlords do not have such a get-out.

By assignment, you do not incur another PRTB payment as it is the same tenancy just a change of tenant.

When assigning, the tenant is responsible for finding the new tenant and also for his costs in doing so.

I have advertised the property on DAFT and the current tenant showed the property to prospective tenants when they called round.

You should advise the tenant that he is responsible for your vouched and reasonable costs if he does not find the new tenant. Furthermore that he is liable to lose his deposit if he vacates without there being a new tenant in place and that he is also liable for the rent as it falls due until a new tenant is in place.

In getting the current tenant in I had to undergo a bit of expense in getting to the apartment to meet him and get the lease signed as we live out of the country. In addition we had to pay to register the tenancy with the PRTB and finally, we had it cleaned. The tenant assured us that he intended to stay for a long time and the property was ideal for his purposes so in my head I divided those costs by a long and happy tenancy. He is a civil servant and still in his job so I presume his financial circumstances have not changed massively since the spring.

This would have been a cost to you for any tenant unless you improved the property especially for him. However, it will always benefit you while you are renting the property irrespective of the tenant.

I know that where I live is absolutely none of his concern. He has done me a favour by showing it to prospective tenants without my being there. His rent has been paid on time and he seemed a decent sort when I met him.

Correct

Am I within my rights, and is it fair and decent, to withhold all or part of his deposit based on costs incurred by us and the fact he has broken the terms of the lease.

There is often a big gap between being within one's rights and being fair and decent.

By rights, a tenant must give his notice of termination in writing. However, as you appear to have accepted his invalid notice, you have no comeback in that respect.

As stated above, you are entitled to retain his deposit if the tenant breaks his lease agreement. However, you must mitigate you loss as quickly as possible. If you have a tenant move in, after two weeks of his vacating, you should refund two weeks rent to the tenant - you are not allowed to have rent from two people at the same time. You are also allowed to retain you reasonable expenses.

I am fairly annoyed with him but no point in making him stay.

Welcome to the real world of renting.

Where I live I could force him to stay and take legal action for the remainder of the value of the lease whether he is there or not.

Thoughts appreciated

Not quite correct - you can't make him stay. However, you could try to enforce the agreement as regards payment of rent as it falls due. However, as pointed out above, you are required by law to mitigate any loss as quickly as possible.

Very rarely will a landlord pursue a tenant for breaking a lease, as in most cases, the property will be re-let within a month and the retention of the deposit covers most things, unless there is significant damage in excess of normal wear and tear.