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

Pssst

This is two women locking horns. You must win because it was agreed what the rent was and therefore that must be what is paid.

brownsauce

fatpig wrote: »

All the miserable landlords are piling in with their tightfisted views now I see.

Well im a penniless student and i still see that what tennent is doing is just is extremely irritating.
Im sure the OP realises that this seems quite petty but its a matter of principal.

westv

fatpig wrote: »

The skinflints should be worrying about the national debt of a trillion pounds not the price of a packet of crisps.

So the tenant should stop wasting the landlords time and pay the correct amount rhen?

ellies_angel

Some of the reponses here from some have anoyed me.

You are renting your room out for a set amount. She agreed that amount when she moved in. She is paying less that the amount that she agreed to pay. It doesn't matter how little or how much, the amount is irrelevent to be honest. Shes playing games and to be honest its not very grown up of her.

TighterThanTwoCoatsOfPain

yeah, the complete lack of respect would chaff my nuts, but would never have raised it anyway.. i mean come on. If you like her then s0d the 31p, of you dont then kick her out.

scubaangel wrote: »

I can understand the OP's point its ''only'' 31p but depending on how long the lodger stays for it could end up a fairly large amount of money.

Oh dear god!! If the woman stays for 5 years its practically less than the cost of re-advertising for a new roommate! (less than £19)

I think the OP may have damaged the relationship for the sake of some coppers.. its perhaps more important when its someone you have to live with rather than someone you let your whole house to.

advent1122

Take her to Judge Judy.
Bert will put her in a headlock until she pays up.

Northern_girl_2

Oh come on, yep the lodger should pay the agreed amount but then I don't think email is the best form of communication for someone you live with.

It sounds like they are both looking for an argument and I don't know what I would be more annoyed about: being underpaid 31p or receiving an email from the person in the room next to me.

Really, I understand that the principle might feel like more than 31p but from a rational point of view pursuing this probably isn't worthwhile.
The lodger may have genuinly overlooked the 31p, feels that the landlord was a little petty by raising it (by email!) and could easily cost more than that by putting the heating up by a degree, leaving lights on, using extra toilet roll etc.

Really, if this is going to cause a row then dealing with the bigger annoyances that a house share throws up is going to be impossible so maybe it is best to ask her to leave now...

Blackpool_Saver

1echidna wrote: »

Sounds rather like a calculated insult - designed to irritate, but making effective comeback difficult. In all probability to be followed by more as others have said.

Yes it's passive aggressive in the medical definition.
Nip it in the bud NOW.
Who is in charge, you or her?

ss70

31p is trivial

Northern_girl_2

Blackpool_Saver wrote: »

Yes it's passive aggressive in the medical definition.
Nip it in the bud NOW.
Who is in charge, you or her?

Sending the email rather than speaking face to face might be seen as passive aggressive too.

Who is in charge? Erm, no one. The lodger rents the house and expects certain things in return. The landlord rents out a house and expects rent in return. It's a two way relationship and they both have a contract to keep to and to find a way to live together peacefully.

Anyone who took the attitude of 'I'm in charge' when it comes to taking on a lodger or a house share is probably in for a bumpy ride. If you open your home up to a lodger then you have to accept that it becomes their home too and you can't treat them like a subordinate. I guess some people might put up with it but I would always look elsewhere for a slightly more conciliatory landlord.