We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
renting to a couple of are in a civil partnership
oakview
Posts: 37 Forumite
We rent our house to two young girls who entered into a cival partnership in may, full wedding the works. Today we have been told there splitting up, we have only spoken to one of the girls, the other was staying at her mothers but the thing is it puts us in a difficult situation. They are both on benefits, housing benefit,we have been asked by the one we saw today to change the locks and take the other girls name off the tenancey agreement, I said no we couldn't change the locks it would be against the law.Any advise greatefully received.
0
Comments
-
I wouldn't try this, you are changing the locks to prevent a legal tenant access to the property they have rented? :eek: Anyone know the current punishment for that? My guess is £5000 and / or a few months inside.Gorgeous_George wrote:I would change the locks if it's not too expensive. Keep the old ones for next time.
If the other one wants access she can always ask.
I wouldn't have rented to them in the first place.
GG
A house isn't a home without a cat.
Those are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others.
I have writer's block - I can't begin to tell you about it.
You told me again you preferred handsome men but for me you would make an exception.
It's a recession when your neighbour loses his job; it's a depression when you lose yours.0 -
BobProperty wrote:I wouldn't try this, you are changing the locks to prevent a legal tenant access to the property they have rented? :eek: Anyone know the current punishment for that? My guess is £5000 and / or a few months inside.
Ok, suggest that the remaining tenant changes the locks. I am, of course, assuming that the other tenant is living elsewhere and not paying rent.
Why is common-sense not so common.
GGThere are 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary and those that don't.0 -
That might be a better idea, then any dispute becomes a civil matter between the two of them. But this is yet another example of where a landlord can easily be in the wrong. The tenant still has a tenancy agreement with you. If the one who left comes back and you have changed the locks, guess who is at fault in the eyes of the law?Gorgeous_George wrote:Ok, suggest that the remaining tenant changes the locks. I am, of course, assuming that the other tenant is living elsewhere and not paying rent....
I think you need it in writing that the one who has moved out, has permanently left and you should consider issuing the one remaining tenant with a new tenancy agreement. You had also better find out what HB is going to do, because my experience says the first thing that will happen is that the benefit will stop until they sort out the Change of Circs or a new HB application is made. (something in the back of my mind says you need a new application, it isn't a C of C)A house isn't a home without a cat.
Those are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others.
I have writer's block - I can't begin to tell you about it.
You told me again you preferred handsome men but for me you would make an exception.
It's a recession when your neighbour loses his job; it's a depression when you lose yours.0 -
I have removed some posts from this thread as they were not really on topic and could be misinterprepted. Please keep this thread on topic.0
-
I would refuse her request, explain your grounds, and suggest that they sort this out between them, hopefully there are no kids involvedI am a Mortgage Adviser
You should note that this site doesn't check my status as a mortgage adviser, so you need to take my word for it. This signature is here as I follow MSE's Mortgage Adviser Code of Conduct. Any posts on here are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as financial advice.0 -
Thanks to all of your suggestions,to which I have already considered and agree,if she wants to change the lock it is beyond our control and her doing,no children are involved so I guess its their personal problem.0
-
they are both legally responsible for the rent jointly and severally - if one moves out the other is fully responsible for all the rent, but, HB wont see it that way - they will stop the rent for the absent one. As soon as the rent goes into arrears, you can go for repossesion of the house on the grounds of rent arrears.
Could the remaining tenant not find another sharer to move in with her ? if so, you could be generous and let her off her obligations under the current AST, and get a new one signed with the new person.0 -
just a thought if this was a husband & wife and s/he had left ,would you change the locks .0
-
I do not understand about comments like ' wouldn't have rented to them in the first place.' wouldn't have rented to them in the first place'. Every relationship is different and hopefully majority of people would not discrimate because of a cival partnership.
B0 -
bristolgymdude wrote: »I do not understand about comments like ' wouldn't have rented to them in the first place.' wouldn't have rented to them in the first place'. Every relationship is different and hopefully majority of people would not discrimate because of a cival partnership.
B
Maybe it was because they were both on benefits.
Hopefully the majority of people would not jump to conclusions.Disclaimer: Any spelling mistakes or incorrect grammar is purely coincidental and in no way reflects the intelligence of the author.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards