Clause in contract - is there a law protecting me from a landlord abusing it?
<p><strong>Context</strong></p>

<p>So, I'm going through the process of creating a shorthold tenancy with a private landlord in the UK. We've done our references and now are down to signing the contract. </p>

<p>Everything in the contract is fine and pretty standard except there seems to be a clause that has potential to be used as a blanket clause at the landlords discretion for any situation. </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Clause 3.3
  The tenant must not use the Property for any illegal, immoral, disorderly or anti-social purposes. </p>
</blockquote>

<p>Obviously we're not planning to Graffiti up our neighbours flats or anything of the sort. </p>

<p>I'm just curious to know if there are any laws protecting me as a tenant from the landlord abusing that i.e immoral is certainly subjective and realistically he could find anything he doesn't like immoral? </p>

<p><strong>Question</strong></p>

<p>Do any laws exist to ensure there is a limit on what can be considered reasonable? If not, am I within my rights to ask the landlord to expand on that clause to ensure there is no doubt between the two parties? </p>

<p>Under an AST agreement the landlord is not permitted to evict you on a whim - if you refuse to leave, in order to 'take possession' the landlord must persuade a court to give him a court order.</p>

<p><a href="http://england.shelter.org.uk/legal/security_of_tenure/assured_tenancies/ending_an_assured_tenancy/applying_for_possession_assured_tenancies" rel="noreferrer">http://england.shelter.org.uk/legal/security_of_tenure/assured_tenancies/ending_an_assured_tenancy/applying_for_possession_assured_tenancies</a></p>

<p>In the fixed term the landlord must first serve the tenant a 'section 8 notice' with a 'ground for possession' (there are 20).</p>

<p><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/50/schedule/2" rel="noreferrer">https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/50/schedule/2</a></p>

<p><a href="http://england.shelter.org.uk/legal/security_of_tenure/assured_tenancies/ending_an_assured_tenancy/grounds_for_possession_assured_tenancies" rel="noreferrer">http://england.shelter.org.uk/legal/security_of_tenure/assured_tenancies/ending_an_assured_tenancy/grounds_for_possession_assured_tenancies</a></p>

<p>Were you to refuse or fight it a court would determine whether the landlord may take possession on the ground in the section 8 notice.</p>

<p>That particular clause you are concerned about is common to the AST agreements I've seen. See for example the government's model agreement:</p>

<p><a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/695944/Model_Agreement_for_an_Assured_Shorthold_Tenancy_and_Accompanying_Guidance.docx" rel="noreferrer">https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/695944/Model_Agreement_for_an_Assured_Shorthold_Tenancy_and_Accompanying_Guidance.docx</a></p>

<p>The guidance isn't specific about "illegal, immoral, disorderly or anti-social purposes" but examples elsewhere include prostitution in the property (doing it yourself or allowing it to be done) or it being used to store stolen goods. </p>

<p><a href="http://england.shelter.org.uk/legal/security_of_tenure/assured_tenancies/ending_an_assured_tenancy/grounds_for_possession_assured_tenancies/discretionary_grounds_assured_tenancies#7" rel="noreferrer">http://england.shelter.org.uk/legal/security_of_tenure/assured_tenancies/ending_an_assured_tenancy/grounds_for_possession_assured_tenancies/discretionary_grounds_assured_tenancies#7</a></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>I'm just curious to know if there are any laws protecting me as a tenant from the landlord abusing that i.e immoral is certainly subjective and realistically he could find anything he doesn't like immoral?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>It is unrealistic to assume the landlord can take possession based on saying anything he doesn't like is immoral.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Do any laws exist to ensure there is a limit on what can be considered reasonable? </p>
</blockquote>

<p>Statute isn't specific about what's "reasonable". Ultimately what's reasonable is what the court says is reasonable. You can look at case law.</p>

<p><a href="http://england.shelter.org.uk/legal/security_of_tenure/assured_tenancies/ending_an_assured_tenancy/grounds_for_possession_assured_tenancies/discretionary_grounds_assured_tenancies#1" rel="noreferrer">http://england.shelter.org.uk/legal/security_of_tenure/assured_tenancies/ending_an_assured_tenancy/grounds_for_possession_assured_tenancies/discretionary_grounds_assured_tenancies#1</a></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>If not, am I within my rights to ask the landlord to expand on that clause to ensure there is no doubt between the two parties?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>You are free to ask the landlord what that clause means and to define it specifically - the landlord is free to do so or walk away from the deal.</p>

<p>Consider that landlords tend to want tenants who will pay on time, keep the property clean and warn them about maintenance problems - I doubt the majority have any interest in their tenants' private lives that the landlord comes to know about unless the landlord anticipates an economic impact.</p>

<p>Tenancy agreements are regarded as consumer contracts, <a href="http://www.landlordlawblog.co.uk/2017/04/26/tenancy-agreements-33-days-tips-day-16-unfair-terms/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">and so must be "fair"</a>. What constitutes "fair" comes from a mixture of the law and previous court cases.</p>

<p>In this case, if a landlord wanted to evict you for any of the stated reasons, he would have to convince a judge that what you had done was in breach of this clause, and that it is sufficient to warrant an eviction.</p>

<p>Because <a href="http://england.shelter.org.uk/legal/security_of_tenure/assured_tenancies/ending_an_assured_tenancy/grounds_for_possession_assured_tenancies/discretionary_grounds_assured_tenancies#5" rel="nofollow noreferrer">breach of tenancy agreement obligations is a discretionary ground</a>, even if the judge agrees that you have broken the agreement, he is not required to issue an eviction order.</p>

<p>Realistically, if the landlord really wanted to evict you, he would wait for any fixed term to end, and issue a section 21 ("no fault") notice instead. The only defence to a section 21 notice is that the landlord <a href="https://england.shelter.org.uk/housing_advice/eviction/section_21_eviction_process" rel="nofollow noreferrer">hasn't followed the correct procedures</a>, so it avoids having to interpret the agreement altogether.</p>

contract-law rental-property england-and-wales