Lodger underpaying by 31p, would you make a fuss?

Snooze

carolt wrote: »

No - you're wrong Ufar.

Sorry, I cannot possibly imagine a situation in which I'd quibble over 31p.

Many people have said 'but what if Tesco's overcharged you by 31p?'

Well, I'm sure I have been overcharged by 31p or so by Tesco's on occasion, but I've let it go, you know.

I earn more than 31p in the time it would take me to ring up/go in and complain about the 31p, so why on earth would I put myself through all the hassle?

Just so I could be 'right' and they could be 'wrong'?

Who cares?

How much more does this applies if I have to actually live with the person and they can make my life a misery in so many little unquantifiable ways? Why would I sacrifice a happy relationship with someone who's living in my house for 31p?

It just beggars belief.

If the OP hates the tenant that much, then get rid of them - but the 31p is really neither here nor there.

So does everyone else on here REALLY pick it up every single time they're overcharged 31p or not paid 31p for work done?

How do they ever have enough time to actually get any work done?

:rolleyes:

So if you were in the OPs position and I was your lodger, I guess you'd be quite happy for me to underpay by 31p one month, £1 the next, £5 the next, £25 the next etc, up to the point of not paying at all because it's not worth arguing over, right?

It seems that half of the people replying on this thread have scoffed at how pathetic the OP is (in their opinion) but yet when previously asked by someone else to state what amount would break the p!ss-taking threshold they all suddenly went very quiet. :rolleyes:

You 'antis' seem to have all the answers, so let's hear it : what amounts should be ignored and what amounts should you address?

Rob

xanderspuppy

If you had agreed an amount for rent and bills then I would expect to pay the agreed amount. I agree with the OP, it's not the 31p, it's the principle. Why does the lodger feel she has the right to just pay what she wants to pay rather than what was agreed? It's a matter of trust and this lodger obviously can't be trusted. I would affronted to be pulled up for underpaying my rent and would immediately correct it! She's at it.

lostinrates

Snooze wrote: »

:rolleyes:the OP is (in their opinion) but yet when previously asked by someone else to state what amount would break the p!ss-taking threshold they all suddenly went very quiet. :rolleyes:

You 'antis' seem to have all the answers, so let's hear it : what amounts should be ignored and what amounts should you address?

Rob

FWIW I do not think OP is pathetic. I also think its more than 31p that is the issue. I further thing OP can learn to simplyfy this in the future to avoid, or make non payment easier to tackle and I think the ''issue'' of the 31 p cn be made as big or small as one likes. I think the person who mentioned two women locking horns had a point. As much as I have been very good friends with women with whom I have lived I do find living with men easier: for some reason its easy for two women to draw battle lines over things and see small things (31p...from both sides) as very large things. If this is right, and the principle is really getting to OP I would suggest that the other benefits of a clean lodger do not amount to a sufficient compatibility and OP should not remain unhappy and consider if she would prefer the fuss of geing a new lodger.

From my point of view I took either cash or astanding order when I had a lodger. (and now DH lodges he pays cash). I never had someone pay me less: what I have had is someone say, I've ten pounds short can I get it to you by the end of the week? I've also had someone say, when we were ordering take out, hey, I'll pay this if you like and take it off the rent. All of this has been fine , for me.

Because I always made it a round number, the lodger, to under pay me, would have been under paying by a minimum of £5 or £10. I would raise at the time of payment that this was not ok, if no explanation were forthcoming. If it happened twice, that would be sufficient for me to say, if this happens again I'm going to need to get someone else because I pay my bills with this money. But it never did arise for me. May be thats because I would never have entertained a conversation about splitting bills and letting a room I had no intention of letting. Maybe its because I didn't get bills involved but set a rate which included them but I think its partly because I was lucky to have, nive people to share with/lodge and I'm intouch with them now.

Only time anything like difficult was DHs cousin, a girl, with whom we had some initial tensions, but it was the two women thing, the fmaily thing, and different ways of living: we found comprimises and she's now not just family but a very, very dear firend.

tbs624

lostinrates wrote: »

From my point of view I took either cash or astanding order when I had a lodger. (and now DH lodges he pays cash)....

Your old man pays cash?...to you?.. or does he lodge elsewhere for part of the week?;)

lostinrates

tbs624 wrote: »

Your old man pays cash?...to you?.. or does he lodge elsewhere for part of the week?;)

LOL, good idea.....

he lodges elsewhere Mon-Fri (Mon-thursday nights really) to be near work. It works for us, similarly, he doesn't pay bills but a round number all inclusive: the reason he lodges rather than flat shares is to avoid that sort of concern and worrying about equal division of housework, maintainance and worrying about things like plumbers

He pays his wonderful LL monthly and does his own washing and room and has no concern of necessity over anything else. That doesn;t mean he doesn't do stuff like take out rubbish etc when he's there, but it means he doesn't have to worry when he's away for work/at home. For him he saw it as a distinct difference to be a lodger rather than a tenant in a share: simplicity being the key benefit.

poppysarah

Rollerball wrote: »

Principles, my jockstrap. Principles don't equate to 31 pence EVER.

Yeah, evict her for 31p. It'll might then become one of those ridiculous stories at the end of news bulletins.

Lodgers can be evicted for no reason.

If the lodger uses the shower & washer excessively then bills will rise and it'll soon be more than 31p a month they aren't paying

struanhellier

Explain politely that the rent is the rent and that you would like (for paperwork and tax reasons) her to pay the full amount. Whip out a fiver and hand it to her, assuring her that it is not the money 'per se' that you are concerned about and you will happily pay the difference if it is a problem, but that you would appreciate the monthly cheque being for the full amount.

If there is a game of psychology going on here, you win hands down. :beer:

Enterprise_1701C

I have not got time to read the whole thread without depriving myself of the rest of MSE today, but personally I think that if you agree to pay a certain amount then THAT is the amount you pay, regardless of whether you want to pay 31 p less or £31 less. I do not think it is the OP being stingy, I think it is the lodger trying to push her luck. If the OP does not make a stand on this, then she might come back and find that the lodger has rented out the spare room herself regardless of what the OP wants.

Notlob

It is interesting to note that there is a degree of aggression that increases in intensity as the thread continues.

Lets all calm down as I suspect a few posts will be reported.

Clearly, there are different stances, I for one do not feel compelled to take the matter further if the 31p shortfall continues, preferring to collect the underpayment at a later date. I think it is just the Pence rather than the Pound that makes me take a more relaxed view about this.

Athina, Just do what you think is right

Penny for your thoughts!

Notlob

Notlob

Three Ha'Pence a Foot


I'll tell you an old-fashioned story
That Grandfather used to relate,
Of a joiner and building contractor;
'Is name, it were Sam Oglethwaite.

In a shop on the banks of the Irwell,
Old Sam used to follow 'is trade,
In a place you'll have 'eard of, called Bury;
You know, where black puddings is made.

One day, Sam were filling a knot 'ole
Wi' putty, when in thro' the door
Came an old feller fair wreathed wi' whiskers;
T'ould chap said 'Good morning, I'm Noah.'

Sam asked Noah what was 'is business,
And t'ould chap went on to remark,
That not liking the look of the weather,
'E were thinking of building an Ark.

'E'd gotten the wood for the bulwarks,
And all t'other shipbuilding junk,
And wanted some nice Bird's Eye Maple
To panel the side of 'is bunk.

Now Maple were Sam's Monopoly;
That means it were all 'is to cut,
And nobody else 'adn't got none;
So 'e asked Noah three ha'pence a foot.

'A ha'penny too much,' replied Noah
'A Penny a foot's more the mark;
A penny a foot, and when t'rain comes,
I'll give you a ride in me Ark.'
But neither would budge in the bargain;
The whole daft thing were kind of a jam,
So Sam put 'is tongue out at Noah,
And Noah made 'Long Bacon ' at Sam

In wrath and ill-feeling they parted,
Not knowing when they'd meet again,
And Sam had forgot all about it,
'Til one day it started to rain.

It rained and it rained for a fortni't,
And flooded the 'ole countryside.
It rained and it kept' on raining,
'Til the Irwell were fifty mile wide.

The 'ouses were soon under water,
And folks to the roof 'ad to climb.
They said 'twas the rottenest summer
That Bury 'ad 'ad for some time.

The rain showed no sign of abating,
And water rose hour by hour,
'Til the only dry land were at Blackpool,
And that were on top of the Tower.

So Sam started swimming to Blackpool;
It took 'im best part of a week.
'Is clothes were wet through when 'e got there,
And 'is boots were beginning to leak.

'E stood to 'is watch-chain in water,
On Tower top, just before dark,
When who should come sailing towards 'im
But old Noah, steering 'is Ark.

They stared at each other in silence,
'Til Ark were alongside, all but,
Then Noah said: 'What price yer Maple?'
Sam answered 'Three ha'pence a foot.'

Noah said 'Nay; I'll make thee an offer,
The same as I did t'other day.
A penny a foot and a free ride.
Now, come on, lad, what does tha say?'

'Three ha'pence a foot,' came the answer.
So Noah 'is sail 'ad to hoist,
And sailed off again in a dudgeon,
While Sam stood determined, but moist.

Noah cruised around, flying 'is pigeons,
'Til fortieth day of the wet,
And on 'is way back, passing Blackpool,
'E saw old Sam standing there yet.

'Is chin just stuck out of the water;
A comical figure 'e cut,
Noah said: 'Now what's the price of yer Maple?'
Sam answered: 'Three ha'pence a foot.'

Said Noah: 'Ye'd best take my offer;
It's last time I'll be hereabout;
And if water comes half an inch higher,
I'll happen get Maple for nowt.'

'Three ha'pence a foot it'll cost yer,
And as fer me,' Sam said, 'don't fret.
The sky's took a turn since this morning;
I think it'll brighten up yet.'

Marriott Edgar