Tenants left owing me rent and the want to take ME to court

MacDrumm

bristol_pilot wrote: »

If the landlord lives on the premises, then the renters are USUALLY considered lodgers, but can be considered tenants in certain circumstances. I once successfully sued my landlord (I lived in his house) for non-return of deposit and proved to the satisfaction of the court that it was a tenancy. There was an agreement headed 'tenancy agreement' signed by both parties, rent was paid monthly and the landlord had taken a months deposit against breakages and non-payment of rent. This was enough for the judge to agree that a tenancy had been created.

Ok, if this us deemed to be a tenancy then the terms set out in the agreement stated 1 months notice is required by either party, which I gave them in writing.

That original agreement however was not signed, so what does that make them?

ceh209

Ok, if this us deemed to be a tenancy then the terms set out in the agreement stated 1 months notice is required by either party, which I gave them in writing.

That original agreement however was not signed, so what does that make them?

I would have THOUGHT, if it was decided they were tenants (but you should get proper advice on this), that tenancy law will override any contract you have with them.

Hence you have to give them 2 months to leave (which you didn't, certainly not properly).

And they have to give you one months. technically coinciding with a rental period. It seems in the circumstances they have given you notice, not the other way round. even if they move out, they are liable for rent for the rest of this period.

So I think it's personally very reasonable that you want them to pay the rest of the month's rent. Depending on dates it could actually be much more!


So whether they're lodgers or tenants, I THINK you're onto a winner! :j


Edit: in terms of notice, anyway. if they are tenants, you'll be in trouble about not putting the deposit in a scheme

MacDrumm

ceh209 wrote: »

I would have THOUGHT, if it was decided they were tenants (but you should get proper advice on this), that tenancy law will override any contract you have with them.

Hence you have to give them 2 months to leave (which you didn't, certainly not properly).

And they have to give you one months. technically coinciding with a rental period. It seems in the circumstances they have given you notice, not the other way round. even if they move out, they are liable for rent for the rest of this period.

So I think it's personally very reasonable that you want them to pay the rest of the month's rent. Depending on dates it could actually be much more!


So whether they're lodgers or tenants, I THINK you're onto a winner! :j


Edit: in terms of notice, anyway. if they are tenants, you'll be in trouble about not putting the deposit in a scheme

This is something they are throwing at me, the fact they can claim on the deposit scheme, if they win they get 3 times the deposit.

I've spoken to my landlord who says MY deposit is in a scheme, so technically theirs is too.. I don't think this will hold any weight though.

Ulfar

If it is deemed to be a tenancy then you are screwed as you haven't protected their deposit.

If they are lodgers you can't whinge when they give 1 weeks notice especially when they haven't signed a contract.

I would make reasonable deductions for any damage and give the rest back.

olly300

MacDrumm wrote: »

This is something they are throwing at me, the fact they can claim on the deposit scheme, if they win they get 3 times the deposit.

I've spoken to my landlord who says MY deposit is in a scheme, so technically theirs is too.. I don't think this will hold any weight though.

Did they have any dealings with your landlord?

Such as pay rent directly to him?

Phone him up to get repairs fixed and he would come round to fix them on their say so?

Contact him to ask him if they could stay, when you gave your notice to him?

If the answer is no, then they would have a hard time proving that they were tenants.

The majority of landlords who allow sub-letting are very careful not to have any direct contact with any sub-tenants otherwise they will become their tenants, and will have legal responsibilities to them.

Plus if you search this site for deposit schemes and the 3 times award you will find threads where the tenants did go to court and didn't get the 3 times the deposit back even when their deposit wasn't protected, AND they were clearly tenants.

To put it bluntly they have clearly no idea of what they are arguing about and it's very easy to tell them to get lost.

BTW your landlord's sub-tenants are your lodgers.

MacDrumm

:rotfl:

olly300 wrote: »

Did they have any dealings with your landlord?

Such as pay rent directly to him?

Phone him up to get repairs fixed and he would come round to fix them on their say so?

Contact him to ask him if they could stay, when you gave your notice to him?

If the answer is no, then they would have a hard time proving that they were tenants.

The majority of landlords who allow sub-letting are very careful not to have any direct contact with any sub-tenants otherwise they will become their tenants, and will have legal responsibilities to them.

Plus if you search this site for deposit schemes and the 3 times award you will find threads where the tenants did go to court and didn't get the 3 times the deposit back even when their deposit wasn't protected, AND they were clearly tenants.

To put it bluntly they have clearly no idea of what they are arguing about and it's very easy to tell them to get lost.

BTW your landlord's sub-tenants are your lodgers.

They had no contact with the landlord in anyway and their letter to me stating deposit schemes and contacting the landlord came across as a thinly veiled threat to get the landlord involved, thinking perhaps that that was something that would worry me. My landlord has been great throughout this giving me support and advice, but wasn't 100% sure on MY legal responsibilities.

Thanks for all the advice and opinions on this, much appreciated. With the help of this thread plus something I just found on the government website about deposit schemes etc (direct.gov.uk/en/HomeAndCommunity/Privaterenting/Tenancies/DG_189120) it looks like I'm in the clear. As I was living in the same house with them, I wasn't required to put their deposit into the scheme.

I do suspect though that they will now claim to be lodgers to suit their argument, so I just need to clarify what notice under lodgers i was obliged to give. It seems as they were paying monthly it would be a months notice, but I'll check.

Tune in next week for the omnibus edition!