Despite us disliking break clauses greatly (this statement is toned down from our true feelings), it’s one of the most common requests to be inserted into our tenancy agreements.
We have therefore given in to the pressure and today, we have updated the Tenancy Builder with a new option of adding a break clause.
The option is not available in the quick blank tenancy and is only available in the main create a new tenancy.
On page two of the Builder (tenancy details), you will see a new option.
On selecting “yes”, a further option appears asking for the earliest expiry of any break clause in months.
Remember, the months you select is when the break clause can be set to “expire” and NOT when it can first be served. For example, if you select six months, the tenant (or landlord) could serve notice in month 4 to expire at the first 6 months of commencement or anytime thereafter (although a landlord would have to wait until at least month 4 plus a day in England).
The proposed clause wording is displayed below for you to check the proposed contents of the clause.
The clause is a fixed minimum of two months for either party but it cannot expire before the number of months you select.
There have been a couple of other changes to the agreements.
Firstly the notice by tenant part has been amended to reflect there may be a break clause.
We’ve added a little further clarity about ensuring tenants only bring safe items into the property (such as electrical appliances). This was already in but it adds further clarification.
We’ve clarified about tenant breakages and that this includes in common areas as well as the property itself.
Finally, we’ve added a new clause about if initial payments due have not been paid on or before the commencement date (such as first rent and deposit (if one)) the landlord may rescind the agreement after 5 working days (if remains unpaid). We’re not entirely sure how enforceable this will be but it should be okay.
Am I missing the point, I have always ensured my tenancy agreements are for the 6 -month fixed period which then rolls on month by month etc. In such circumstances a break clause would appear to be of little use. Is the whole concept of a break clause now being introduced purely in preparation for what appears to be the pending imposition – by Government – of longer term tenancies.
Unfortunately, as has been stated by many previously, legislators fail to comprehend that many Landlords are very happy to have “good” Tenants living in their properties for long periods of time, I am sure that I am not alone in stating that I have several long standing tenants of over 15 years. However the concerns relate to the facilities that are – or will be – open to Landlords when they have a “bad” tenant and they need to remove them from the property.
No, we’ve been asked questions about break clauses for years but always resisted putting one in our agreements because like you suggest, they’re unnecessary and confusing. Most cases we see are 12-month tenancies but with a break at 6 months or after. However, just doing a six-month term achieves exactly the same thing!
It’s just something some people like to do so, for now, we’ll just roll with it and see how it goes.
A break clause is unlikely to have any effect under any new proposals.