The Weightmans website would like to use cookies to store information on your computer to improve our website. To find out more about the cookies we use and how to delete them, see our privacy policy.

Newsletter

Commercial Property Focus - May 2009

Chasing the arrears

Recovering rent arrears from former tenants and Section 17 notices

Since 2003 the case of Scottish & Newcastle Plc v Raguz has been rambling through the courts and here we give an outline of the history of this case, the position as it is now and how it benefits landlords.

The statutory requirement for notice to be given
Pursuant to S17 (2) of the Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995 (“the Act”) a Landlord  can require a former tenant to pay rent and any other fixed charge provided notice is served on the former tenant within six months of these sums becoming due.  Pursuant to S17 (4) of the Act a Landlord can even serve notice on the former tenant if the amount is unknown, for example pending the outcome of a rent review, provided the notice states that the former tenant’s liability could be greater than that outlined in the notice served.  A further notice must then be served, within three months after the actual amount claimed has been established,  setting out the amount due.

Brief background to the case
The case involved two Underleases and Scottish & Newcastle were the original tenants.  There had been a number of assignments following the commencement of the lease.  One such assignment was to Mr Raguz under an indemnity agreement which was made pursuant to S24 (1) of the Land Registration Act 1925.  Another of the assignees had run into financial problems racking up rent arrears and an administrator was appointed.  A rent review had been due in or about 1995 but the new rent had not been fixed until the end of 2000.  Once the rent had been established the Landlord served Section 17 notices on Scottish & Newcastle for the recovery of the arrears of rent and a considerable amount of back rent.  Scottish & Newcastle paid the sums requested.  They went on to demand recovery of the payments made from Mr Raguz as assignee under the indemnity agreement outlined above.  Mr Raguz believed Scottish & Newcastle should not have been liable to the landlord for the rent review amounts.  His argument was that the landlord had not given the correct information in the Section 17 notices served on them as the landlord had omitted to reserve the right to claim the unknown sums in the notices, these being the amounts established as being due following the rent reviews.

It was initially held by the court that the date upon which the amounts became due was the rent review date but this was dismissed on appeal.  The court stated that the due date is the date when liability occurs not when the exact amount of liability is established.  The top and bottom of this decision was that landlords were left in a difficult position when rent review processes were delayed entailing them having to serve S17 notices every six months whilst the rent review was being considered so as to protect their position enabling them to recover the backdated increases from a former tenant. 

The case then went to the House of Lords to interpret Section17 (2) of the Act and they interpreted it differently.  They stated that when a rent review has not been completed then any rent that is due on each payment day will be the pre-rent review rent.  The rent then only becomes due when the actual amount due is established.  The majority held that upon drafting Section 17 (2) of the Act it was Parliament’s intention not to require landlords to serve Section 17 notices of protection every six months if the rent review had been delayed. 

Decision benefits landlords
Therefore landlords are only required to serve a Section 17 notice on a former tenant if the current tenant has failed to pay the established sum due.  Although the court’s decision in this case appears to be beneficial to landlords this may have an adverse effect on former tenants and guarantors as landlords can recover rent arrears from them ore easily. Landlords will need to ensure that all the correct steps are taken to make certain they have a right to recover the amounts due pursuant to Section 17 of the Act.

Karen Neald
Solicitor
Weightmans LLP
karen.neald@weightmans.com