Assuming that the lessor relies on the break clause by requisitioning his tenant – if the tenant refuses to evacuate and remains in the property, the landlord must initiate legal proceedings so that he can obtain an order from the judge. The judge will then review the break clause to see if it is valid. If the judge is not satisfied with the clause, the owner will not be taken into possession. Victoria has spent some time with the Consumer Rights Act and specifically with Schedule 2 of this legislation, which gives some examples of the types of contractual consumer clauses that can be considered unfair. The seventh example in the calendar is “A term with the purpose or effect of authorizing the operator to terminate the contract on a discretionary basis if the consumer does not have the same option… I think you can look at your previous agreement and see if it has a break clause. An interruption clause generally indicates the form and duration of the termination required to terminate the lease. If the break clause is no different, the right to break is exercised by a written notification.  Under no circumstances was the exact modus operandi of the clause explained to the tenants. If the lease contains a break clause allowing the lessor to terminate it before six months after the start of the lease, the lease is not a short-term lease agreement (AST).
On the contrary, it will be a temporary rental period, provided that the conditions of a guaranteed status are met. However, a guaranteed short-term rent is not invalidated if the contract contains a break clause that can only be exercised by the tenant. I don`t think it`s really unfair, because it doesn`t create an unbalanced position. In fact, it gives the tenant more rights as opposed to the usual position that the landlord is not at all obliged to rent the property. These are intended to protect consumers from clauses that deprive tenants of their rights unfairly or unjustifiably. However, the remedies available do not help either of my two tenants. I can look at the agreement and give you an answer with a document that you can send them to bring them into the real world. You have not included what you think is the break clause, so I cannot discuss whether you appear to have complied with it or not. It is important to respect the specific text of the clause or the notice may not be valid. Although errors in a communication do not necessarily disprove it, provided they are clear in all circumstances, the error is obvious and the recipient can certainly count on it.  If you are trying to get out and the owner/agent does not leave you (because they say “only at the end of 8 months”), it seems reasonable to argue that “at the end of a relevant period” means that you can terminate the contract at the end of each month with a 2-month period.
Any other interpretation would be unfair (imo). My landlord tells me that I have to pay for the 6 months (until a new tenant is found) – the 500 pounds and it must be up to the 1st of a month. What I see is that we have an early termination clause that I do not have to pay more than my notice.