Counsel was instructed by the tenant who entered a 24‑month assured shorthold tenancy starting March 2023, managed by a professional management company. Between January and April 2025, the parties exchanged offers and counter‑offers by email about term length, rent and a break clause. The landlords withdrew offers in mid‑April 2025 and served a section 21 notice in late April 2025. The tenant raised unresolved disrepair and listed costs for blinds, curtains and other fixtures installed during the tenancy.
Whether the email exchanges produced a binding renewal agreement or remained unfinished negotiations. Whether the s.21 notice was valid or defeasible by lack of prescribed documents or deposit protection.
Whether the tenant’s expenditure and disrepair complaints give rise to compensation or a practical defence to possession. Whether the tenant should continue paying rent during the dispute.
There was no concluded renewal contract: the correspondence reflects successive offers/counter‑offers with essential terms unresolved and therefore no binding agreement.
The s.21 notice appears formally valid but should be challenged if prescribed documents or deposit protection cannot be evidenced; disrepair issues bolster defences only if supported by clear documentary or inspection evidence.
Practical steps: remain in occupation until a court order; preserve all emails, receipts, repair reports and any lab results; continue paying rent to avoid arrears; if proceedings are issued, plead any documentary defects to s.21 and advance disrepair evidence; weigh litigation costs against relocating.
Call us – Mon-Fri 8:30am – 6:30pm
+44 (0) 20 3034 0077
By submitting this form, I accept this website’s Privacy Policy