non signed s21 notice old version

4 Oct 2017 | 2 comments

would this not be acceptable in court as its not signed?



  1. guildy

    Unfortunately, we don’t know the answer! It’s never been tested by a court of record (to our knowledge).

    Section 21 simply requires the following:

    For a 21(1)(b) – “the landlord or, in the case of joint landlords, at least one of them has given to the tenant not less than two months’ notice in writing stating that he requires possession of the dwelling-house.”

    For a 21(4)(a) – “that the landlord or, in the case of joint landlords, at least one of them has given to the tenant a notice in writing stating that, after a date specified in the notice, being the last day of a period of the tenancy and not earlier than two months after the date the notice was given, possession of the dwelling-house is required by virtue of this section; …”

    Notice how nowhere in section 21 does it require it to be signed (unlike the new prescribed form). However, knowing what courts are like, they may feel it ought to be signed in order to establish it’s from the landlord.

    • holborn1977

      I agree with Guildy’s assessment. In other areas of law, a tick or a digital signature is accepted (for example, for signing a credit agreement online) as the signature is not necessarily the person’s signed written signature, but any clear mark of authorisation by the signee.

      When a tenancy is GRANTED, it’s the intention that counts, not necessarily what’s written on the agreement.

      However, as you say, it’s always best to assume the worst of judges in possession claims – judges are often biased in favour of tenants. eden2011 could try asking the court manager or duty solicitor to regard it as de minimis.

Submit a Comment

View your previously asked questions. (Will only show questions from August 2020)

(Link above back to topic only works for questions added after end of August 2020)