Boyfriend not on TA

silvercar

Gingernutmeg wrote: »

But I'm just wondering, what would happen if the boyfriend had a really, really bad credit record, or there was some other reason that put a LL off? Could a LL reasonably withold permission for someone's partner to move in on those grounds? What would be the legal position of the tenant? Could it be argued on human rights grounds (probably article 16 of the Universal declaration, regarding the right to marry and found a family, or even article 25, the right to a standard of living (including housing) for them and their family - could this also apply to someone who wanted to live with someone?). Just thinking out loud here ... I'd imagine that in reality that a tenant who caused a fuss over this would find that they'd be chucked out when it was time to renew the agreement, but I wonder what would happen if someone refused permission for a partner to move in to a rented property and it was challenged legally?

Key question here. Does the LL/LA have the right to refuse to let BF move in?

I would have thought that the LL could refuse to add BF to tenancy without a credit check etc (for rent insurance and possibly building insurance reasons), but that there would be no grounds for refusing to add BF as permitted occupier.

Geenie

tbs624 wrote: »

Indeed.
You hadn't stated your view on this in your first 2 posts , although you said in your 3rd that you had.It will probably be of help/interest to the OP that you have now answered that part of the her query.
Plain daft? Permitted occupier status is a valid alternative.

:rolleyes:There is no argument about your personal choice as a LL, but your posts contain phrases such as "need an AST", & the sentence you have used above, which suggest that using PO as an option is somehow not quite legit. Permitted occupier status also comes under the heading of doing "everything by the book" and if the T and her bf were happy with that as an option then they would have been been "given everything they should in law", and your property is still protected.

As a LL, you may personally view it as preferable to add the bf to an AST as a joint T for your own property, but IMO your wording seemed to suggest that granting permitted occupier status was not a *valid* option and that simply is not the case.

I can't argue this anymore, as going around in circles. I didn't say that permitted occupier status was ever not an option, but that I and many people I know would not accept it as a LL. The fact the OP's LL has brought it up in the first place shows that they are not happy with it either. So there is a least two of us who feel the same way!

In my case, the NEED for an AST can be changed to ESSENTIAL for anyone living in my properties! But I am an oddball clearly when it comes to being a LL, and your advice will be far better for the OP.

Pepzofio

Wow! Haven't been near a computer over the weekend - thanks for all of your responses!

To clarify, I do envisage moving my boyfriend in at some point, all being well. If he has to be named on the TA then I also have no problems paying for him to be credit checked, although I do feel the fees are a bit steep. I think the sign up fees were about £180 for a single tenant or nearly £300 for joint tenants, which is why I'm loathe to pay for myself to be checked again! (If it was just £35 each I'd probably just pay it rather than argue over it.)

I'm happy with the house, LL & LA, so I don't want to become seen as a 'problem tenant', but I would like to know what my negotiating position is and what other options I could suggest to the LL/LA. If I could get him put on as a PO that would suit me, as I'm happy to take all responsibility for the property. Also, although I'd prefer the flexibility of a periodic tenancy I would be happy to consider resigning if the LL prefered it, but I would object to paying resign fees of £300! (Assuming I took the opportunity to put boyfriend on TA.)

With the PO option, would it necessitate a new TA? Or could I just request/get permission in writing from LL? (I realise they may use it as a bargaining chip to get a new TA signed, but would like to be clear whether this is a legal requirement or their prerogative.)

Thanks again for all your responses!

silvercar

With the PO option, would it necessitate a new TA? Or could I just request/get permission in writing from LL?

No, the LL could sign a letter allowing BF as PO at anytime.

The point to consider, for a landlord, is what action they can take if the landlord refuses to allow a PO and the tenant refuses to leave. What is the point of evicting a tenant through the courts at the end of a fixed term just to stop BF moving in?