Is There A Clause Referring To Section 196 Of The Law Of Property Act 1925 In Your AST?

It is important to know if your tenancy agreement includes a term that the service of notice must be in accordance with section 196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 (the ‘Act’).

This can be a problem because it restricts the ways you can serve a notice and makes it easier for an unscrupulous tenant to defend a claim for possession.

Before 1 May 2026, landlords and letting agents were familiar with the many potential pitfalls and risks associated with Section 21 notices, which were commonly used to bring Assured Shorthold Tenancies to an end. Since 1 May 2026, Section 21 is no longer available for new notices in the private rented sector in England. However, service issues remain highly relevant for Section 8 notices and for any valid pre-1 May 2026 Section 21 notices still being pursued under the transitional rules. 

Any problem with the notice can cause problems with the tenant eviction process, and landlords and agents may face the problem of having to re-serve the notice to correct the error. Failing to do so can prove costly in terms of lost rent and lost time, and could be impossible for Section 21 notices.

A potentially valid defence to a possession claim can be that the notice was not validly served on the tenant. That issue may arise in relation to a Section 8 notice, and may also arise in relation to a transitional Section 21 claim where the notice was served before 1 May 2026 and remains capable of being pursued within the statutory deadline.

Where section 196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 does not apply, or where the tenancy agreement contains a clear alternative service clause, personal service can be a good way to prove service of a notice. That means providing the notice to the tenant in person. If necessary, a witness statement or certificate of service can then be produced confirming that the relevant notice was handed to, and received by, the tenant at a specific time and place.

Including Section 196 of the Law Property Act 1925 as the exclusive method for serving notices can complicate service by restricting your freedom to serve by first class post. The reason for this is that Section 196 requires that notices required or authorised by the Act must be in writing; that service is sufficient if the notice is left at the relevant last-known place of abode or business, or, in the case of a lessee or mortgagor, affixed or left on the land or building; and that service is also sufficient if sent by registered letter and not returned undelivered. Crucially, where the registered-letter route is used, the Act states that service is sufficient if the letter is not returned undelivered by the postal operator. That can create practical problems if the letter is returned undelivered or delivery is disputed. This immediately creates a potential further issue and risk for landlords and letting agents. What if a tenant doesn’t sign for delivery of the letter? What if they aren’t at home and it is returned? Service of the notice might be challenged. The claim for possession (months later) might be defended, and the landlord might be unsuccessful in obtaining a possession order. 

The landlord might even be ordered to pay the tenant’s costs. Tenants may be able to obtain advice and assistance through free or reduced cost schemes like legal aid, depending on the circumstances.

For the above reasons we would suggest landlords and agents consider removing reference to Section 196 within standard tenancy agreements. Instead, there should be a clause that deals with how notices may be served, including by hand, first-class post, recorded delivery and/or email, and also specifying when service is deemed to take place. 

Where a notice is served by post and there is no contrary intention, section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 may assist with deemed service. However, landlords should not assume this will cure a poorly drafted tenancy clause or a failure to follow a contractually required service method. In possession proceedings, evidence of service remains important. First class post is the way that we typically will serve notices where we are instructed and Section 196 is not incorporated into the tenancy agreement.

Recommendation

• Landlords and Letting Agents should consider whether section 196 Law Property Act 1925 is included within their tenancy agreements, and whether it would be better to remove that clause.
• Ensure you keep up-to date with future legal changes by signing up to our legal updates service:

On 28 October 2025, the long awaited Renters Rights Act 2025 (‘the Act’) received Royal Assent, meaning it is now law. Phase 1 of the Act came into force for England’s private rented sector on 1 May 2026. This includes very significant changes for landlords and tenants, including changes to tenancy agreements, tenant rights, deposits, notices and eviction processes, amongst others. For the current position on this, see our blog here. This legislation includes numerous changes designed to alter the relationship between landlords and tenants, aimed at giving tenants greater security of tenure and rights. It is no longer possible to pursue possession claims via the accelerated possession route unless your Section 21 notice was served by 30 April 2026 and you issue the claim by the earlier of the time period in the notice or 31 July 2026. Section 21 notices have been abolished. Whilst Section 21 notices will be abolished, the failure to comply with Section 196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 can still provide a potential defence to a claim for possession based on a Section 8 notice. Contact our team if you need assistance and we will be happy to help.