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

1echidna

ss70 wrote: »

I'm still absolutely shocked, 31 pence short!
i really feel sorry for the OP. the pain and anguish the OP must be going through must be unbearable; i do not know how she copes. i wish her every success in getting her 31 pence back and justice been served.

P.S. don't forget to charge them interest too!

And of course you wouldn't be slightly irritated if your employer rounded your pay packet down to the nearest pound? Is the sarcasm really necessary?

poppysarah

1echidna wrote: »

And of course you wouldn't be slightly irritated if your employer rounded your pay packet down to the nearest pound? Is the sarcasm really necessary?

Indeed!

And I think the point is that they know how much they should be paying and they're not. There's no reason other than taking the pee and once they start, some people just can't stop.

ss70

1echidna wrote: »

And of course you wouldn't be slightly irritated if your employer rounded your pay packet down to the nearest pound? Is the sarcasm really necessary?

I really would not care.

Would you bill your employer for 31 seconds of overtime?

robpw2

so shes paying you the correct rent but no paying 31p on top for bills .. ?

odd amount lol

bumpoowee

if thats the only issue, don't go causing trouble over 31p. I'm sure its irritating but in the big scheme of thing who gives a !!!! about 31p.

1echidna

ss70 wrote: »

I really would not care.

Would you bill your employer for 31 seconds of overtime?

I am retired but when I was working I was not paid for overtime. I suppose attitudes to pennies can vary but I must admit I do go to some trouble to save relatively small amounts on purchases. Old saying about watching pennies and the pounds look after themselves I suppose.

Snooze

carolt wrote: »

No, but presumably 31p is a very small fraction of what they're paying. If you're buying a pint, say, 31p is quite a large proportion.

As a proportion of rent and bills, it's tiny.

More to the point, this isn't a standard landlord & tenant relationship - it's a lodger - someone who lives in your house.

Are you going to fight them every time they use too much toilet roll? Or leave the light on?

Let alone how you sort out things like communal phone blls.

There has to be a bit of give and take with a lodger or you'd just drive each mad.

I think it's really, really petty, actually. It's quite possible that this tenant is an annoying/bad tenant in other ways.

But on this particular issue, as posted, the OP just comes across as really petty, frankly.

Normally I agree with you Carol, but not here. I don't think it's the amount that is bothering the OP, it could be 1p under or £1 under, it wouldn't make any great difference to their finances, it's simply the principle of it. If it was 31p under by accident or oversight then I doubt anyone would say anything about it, but it is clear in this case that the reduction is being done deliberately for whatever reason (seems to be to just to annoy the OP to me ) and therefore the amount becomes irrelevant because they are just taking the p1ss for the sake of it. If the contract states the rent is £100 per month then that is what you pay, not £99.69.

To show I wouldn't put up with the p1ss-taking, if it were me in the OPs position I would give the lodger 30 days written notice of a rent increase of £5 per month.

Rob

svensjr

Agreed, or up to £51 and if she complains, tell her it's only 69p, what's the big deal

1echidna

Snooze wrote: »

Normally I agree with you Carol, but not here. I don't think it's the amount that is bothering the OP, it could be 1p under or £1 under, it wouldn't make any great difference to their finances, it's simply the principle of it. If it was 31p under by accident or oversight then I doubt anyone would say anything about it, but it is clear in this case that the reduction is being done deliberately for whatever reason (seems to be to just to annoy the OP to me ) and therefore the amount becomes irrelevant because they are just taking the p1ss for the sake of it. If the contract states the rent is £100 per month then that is what you pay, not £99.69.

To show I wouldn't put up with the p1ss-taking, if it were me in the OPs position I would give the lodger 30 days written notice of a rent increase of £5 per month.

Rob

I must admit I hesitate to describe it definitively as p1ss taking. Could be it is just a dig at the OP perhaps in part for the oddly precise to the penny rent or perhaps as a minor tit for tat for something else. However in general I would expect a lodger to have a degree of respect for the person who lets out or home for her to share and if this is indicative of her trying to gain some kind of dominant position over the OP, she is not a lodger that I feel the OP should tolerate.

carefullycautious

This needed sorting out at the start. The problem now is that if you give in and allow this, she has won and who knows what will happen next

If I moved into someones house and they stipulated a rent/bills etc at a given amount I would not dream of short changing them. I would be embarrassed even if it only 31pence.

I would sit her down and discuss whether she would prefer to pay xamount instead of xamount + 31p.