The Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 is regarded as a constitutional law that was enacted in the United Kingdom and extended to the Wales and England. It has been argued that Part II of the act involves a stator form of the code governing business tenancies. Looking at part I of the law, it has been noted that it entirely deals with the residential tenancies and the section is largely superseded (McLachlan et al., 2022). According to the law, it is asserted that the individuals are supposed to make payment of the rent in the full time, make informed of the landlord in cases where one is suffering from financial challenges or even in the incidences whereby one stands a position of not paying rent as per the expectation. It is argued that the law requires individuals to always keep the property repaired and clear throughout and notification to landlord is expected whenever there is damage or even leaking of the property (Haley, 2020). In this essay, major emphasis would be giving advises to individuals in different scenarios in line with Landlord and Tenant Act 1954.
Looking at the first scenario, it is clear that there was an involvement of the Status Palmer Ltd. whereby it is agreed that there was an expiry of the lease effluxion of the time in the year 2018 but the tenant is still in the occupation according to the case study. In this conjunction, it had been noted that the premises that had discussed was in poor states as it had not been repaired for a while (Lawton, 2022). Following such, the tenants decided not to be paying the rent as the property had not been kept clear and had not been made to the standards as per the law. In this connection, there is valuable form of advice that could be given to both the landlord and the tenants of the premises in regard to the law.
In the view of the condition of the premises, it is prohibited by the act that there is always a need for the individuals to advice the landlord to follow the law as it states. For individuals who do not follow the law are punishable (Haley, 2020). If the landlord does not follow the Act, it is advisable that the tenants are supposed to sue the landlord to the court as the law abides. It can be drawn that the tenants have not also followed the law. In regard to the law, there is nowhere stated that individuals are supposed to act negatively to the landlords who do not follow the act. However, it can be noted that the individuals ended up making a decision of not paying rent as the landlord has not repaired the premise for a while.
Instead, it is advisable that the individuals are supposed to make sure that they inform landlords on the conditions of the premises. Following the case study that has been provided, it is clear that the tenants were not taking their position in accordance to the law. They are therefore punishable for such action that they have taken and lack of their initiatives as per the landlord and tenants Act 1954. It is thus advisable that the tenants are required by the Act to be informing the tenants of such.
The change is required as the landlord stands an opportunity to sue the tenant as they are not making payment as per the expectation and no any form of the information that the landlord is getting from the tenant (Haley, 2020). Following such, it is clear that both the tenants and the landlords are punishable to the law and in case any of them move to the court for filing a case each one would be reliable for penalty as per the law. In other words, both the tenants and the landlords have not put into considerations the assertion of Landlord and tenants Act 1954. It is therefore important for the tenants and landlord of the premise to make necessary changes and abide to the law before as they would later land into a problem as the law cuts across both the tenants and the landlord.
Looking at the case scenario two, it can be drawn that it involves Billy Skynard Plc. Company which was obliged with the responsibility of running busy form of businesses for a period of 15 years. It is clear that the firm was not ready for the relocation. In this case, it had been noted that the firm was supposed to make sure that the operational businesses under the firms are supposed to entirely been repaired throughout (Haley, 2020). The firms under the organization are also supposed to make sure that they continuously making payments in time and in full amount as per the expectation of the law.
Additionally, if at any particular moment Billy Skynard fails to make sure that the services offered to the busy businesses are not been upgraded in accordance to the expectation of the client, there are high chances that the firm would be sued in the court of the law. Similarly, the busy businesses are subjected to the law as in the case whereby the businesses fail to offer payments in full and in the expected time, there are high chances that Billy has an opportunity to sue the clients in the court of law.
In the cases whereby the busy businesses which are clients of the Billy Skynard Plc. stands an opportunity to not pay for the services in time, it is advisable that the busy businesses are supposed to make the Billy Plc. be aware of the condition and Billy is supposed to listen into such. At the same time, it is an obligation of the busy business to inform Billy in case of damage or any repair that is required in their operations. In such incidences, it is required by the act that Billy is required to make necessary changes and upgraded the services as per the client’s requirements (Beckett, 2018). If Billy fails to do such, it is by the Act that there are high chances that the clients of the firm can easily sue Billy for not having turned out as per their needs.
Therefore, both Billy and busy business who are its clients are supposed to make sure that they observe the Landlord and tenants Act 1954 as it offers guidelines on how to come up with contracts and how the contract should be signed. In cases whereby any of the two parties goes against the guidelines offered by the law, there is high chances that the other party can sue that party in the court of law and huge penalty would befall the party that is not observing the act.
In the view of the last scenario, it has been realized that there was an incorporation that was regarded as Charlie Charles Plc. which was involved in running business for a period of five years. In the five years, there was certain form of activities that the firm was required to put into considerations. It was clear that the duties of the firm were been discharged before the outbreak of pandemic (Ti, 2021). On the outbreak of the pandemic, the firm closed down but there was an agreement that the clients are supposed to pay half of the rent regardless of whether Charlie Charles Plc. is serving the clients or not. It is also noted that the conditions of the firm are very poor as the owners of the firm has not taken an initiative of repairing the premises or upgrading the services that it is offering to the businesses. Following such, there is an important message that is supposed to be given to both parties as there is something missing as per the requirement of landlord and tenants Act 1954.
In the perception of the Charlie Charles Plc., there is a mistake that the owners of the firm are doing. It is out of the requirements that the owners of the firm are supposed to follow regardless of the outbreak of the pandemic. It is required by the Act that they are supposed to make the premises clear and fully repaired. It is clear that the clients are still making payments in time and the owners of the firm receiving payments are not making the obligation of repairing the premises (Ti, 2021). Following such, the clients of Charlie Plc. are supposed to sue it in the court of law though it is clear that the clients were also in a big problem as they had not taken an initiative of informing the firm about the condition of the premises. In this connection, it can be drawn that each party in this argument had not followed the requirements of the lease Act that is been discussed in the paper.
It is therefore advisable that the two parties are supposed to take their duties as per the requirements imply because failure to that the two parties would end up falling into a big problem as the Act does not allow for such kind of the behavior and anyone who is not abiding to the law is punishable by the law.On top of such, the clients of the firm are advised to make sure that they make their payments in time (Kurtz & Noble-Allgire, 2017). In cases whereby they are not in a position to make their payments in time, it is advisable that they are supposed to communicate to the Charlie Plc. in time and discuss on the way forward.
It is clear that the pandemic had made things be difficulty for the all parties but since there was an agreement that the clients are expected to render half their rent, they should abide to such and in case of any challenge communication should be done in time. At the same time, the payment should be timely throughout as per the law that governing the landlord and tenants Act 1954 (Furber, Sullivan & King, 2017). Failure to such, it is clear that Charlie Charles Plc. has an ability of suing its client in the court of law and the clients would be punished for not obeying the Act. It therefore advisable for the clients to keenly observe the requirement of the Act for them not to fall into trap as per the law. On observation of such, it is clear that each and every party involved in the contract would be in line with the requirement of the landlord and tenant Act 1954.
In conclusion, the discussion that has been provided in the paper has offered an important form of message that educates individuals in various sectors. It is through the paper that there is certain form of rights that have been given to both tenants and landlords especially in United Kingdom. The rights cut across each and every party and makes individuals stand an opportunity to exercise their rights. It is from the discussion that there are certain forms of the requirements that landlord and tenant Act 1954 has offered to the individuals. Each party needs to be keen and exercise its duties as those who go against the policies are punishable by the law. It has also been noted that either the tenant or even the landlord has an ability of suing the other party in the court of the law (Furber, Sullivan & King, 2017). Meanwhile, the three scenarios have given out important information and has emphasized on the obligation of the Act. Following such, an elaboration of the requirement of the act has ended up coming out vividly. In summary, the paper has served as a support for the rights endorsed to people who wishes to rent or own a property within the United Kingdom. It is clear that the Act has spread out to all corners of the United Kingdom and should throughout be followed up to the later.
References
Beckett, J. (2018). When leases end: Some thoughts on recently reported cases.Journal of Building Survey, Appraisal & Valuation, 7(1), 28-33. Web.
Furber, J., Sullivan, C., & King, V. (2017). Considering the ‘all too familiar’: The Landlord and Tenant Act 1954:‘Substantial work of construction’and the role of the building surveyor.Journal of Building Survey, Appraisal & Valuation, 6(2), 106-111. Web.
Haley, M. (2020). compensation for business tenants: Mischief and Malady. The Cambridge Law Journal, 79(3), 490–526.
Kurtz, S. F., & Noble-Allgire, A. (2017). The Revised Uniform Residential Landlord and Tenant Act: A Perspective from the Reporters.Real Property Trust & Estate Law Journal, 52(3), 417-531. Web.
Lawton, H. (2022). Landlords: Be prepared for the end of your lease. Practice Management, 32(2), 38-40.
McLachlan, S., Kyrimi, E., Dube, K., Fenton, N., & Webley, L. C. (2022). Lawmaps: Enabling legal AI development through visualisation of the implicit structure of legislation and lawyerly process. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 1-26. Web.
Ti, E. S. W. (2021). Of Landlords and Tenants: Property in the midst of a pandemic. Statute Law Review.