How to give a tenant notice

Willsnarf1983

theartfullodger wrote: »

They can share front-door, hall, kitchen, bathroom but as long tenant has exclusive possession of just-one-room he is an "occupier with basic protection".

If, conversely , tenant is sharing bedroom with an unrelated nordic super-model, he would be an "excluded occupier".



Cheers!

Lodger

Stick this into Lamens terms for me please

so you can't have a lodger anymore?

Will

theartfullodger

"Lodger" is a term used by many and understood to mean different things by different people.


occupier with basic protection
&
excluded occupier

are, I understand, the correct terms which have specific, different, rights & responsibilities.

Housing law is complex! e.g. "Secure of Tenure" introductory course by Shelter takes 2 days (introductory only...!!))

Cheers!

Lodger (I know what my name means - do you??)

pinkshoes

So basically if you give your lodger the correct notice to move out and they don't, you then have to get a court order to make them move.

In which case surely you can then deduct court costs from their deposit, and use the small claims court to reclaim any other costs over the deposit amount?

Any lodger would be a complete muppet not to move out when asked!

tbs624

clutton wrote: »

...btw - smoking in your own home is not illegal - her room is her home

Putting nails in walls is not illegal either, but you know that most agreements state that that's not permitted. Smoking causes damage & deterioration and it's pretty reasonable for it to be a conditon of any agreement that a lodger/T doesn't smoke in the property. There are all manner of things which are legal but it doesn't follow that any of us should have to tolerate them occurring in our property when it's been agreed otherwise.

teepoo wrote: »

..... I request that you remove your processions from my house and return the keys before the 15th of August.

My highlighting...so it wasn't just the smoking then.....?;)
Teepoo/Pete -if the lodger's bedroom does not have a lock on the door and she's sharing your facilities, simply follow your lodger agreement's 4 weeks notice . You can change the locks and pop her gear outside too, if necessary, but be aware that its a criminal offence to make threats when actually getting her to go. If you want to clarify ring your Council's Private Sector Tenancy Relations Officer or contact Shelter first.
Be prepared for her to her head off for the remainder of her stay.....

Jowo_2

theartfullodger wrote: »

I- it is not what the parties (tenant/landlord) have agreed to or signed up to.. it is what the law says that matters..). And exclusive possession of just-one-room is enough if there is also payment (money or in kind) and a term (1 week, 12 months...)

(A Landlord since 2000)

Thanks for the comprehensive info. The landlordzone site indicates a way round this exclusive possesssion of a single room constraint, perhaps this is common to standard lodger agreements.

What you need to do before you take a lodger
To avoid creating full tenancies or becoming entangled with HMO regulations and to qualify for the Rent-a-Room scheme, you must meet certain requirements:
1 The room you let must be in your main residence, where you live most of the year - if you move out the lodger could become a full tenant by default!
2 The lodger must not have exclusive possession of a self-contained part of your property - cookng facilities and bathroom etc., need to be shared with you! You lodger agreement should give you the power to enter and clean the lodger's room, so that exclusive possession of any part of the property is avoided.

http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/lodgers_rent-a-room.htm

mlz1413

just a reminder that toopoo has been given advise on this subject recently.
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?p=23144395&highlight=#post23144395

theartfullodger

Re Jowo's remark...

You lodger agreement should give you the power to enter and clean the lodger's room, so that exclusive possession of any part of the property is avoided.

Err... probably illegal, see in particular...
!Agreements containing sham devices purported to deny the occupier exclusive possession as exemplified in Antoniades v Villiers where it was held that an agreement provided for the separate occupancy of an unmarried couple in what was to be their home was held to be a tenancy because the separate agreements was clearly a sham device and the doctrine of pretence would be invoked whereby the courts would strike down the sham devices purporting to deny the occupier exclusive possession since it was clearly evident that the unmarried couple intended to have exclusive possession of the property."

Cheers!

Lodger