Lodger didn't move in on date agreed - tricky Q - can anyone help?

sonastin

bundly wrote: »

I've just done some research on L3, he is an MSc and successful company director who is employed by my local council as a consultant 3 days a week - hence only needs to sleep here two or three nights and never at weekends. Married with four kids and lives 300 miles away in a big, expensive house. His company has a website and plenty of staff, so is doing really well.

Not a single word of that tells you what he is like to live with. I've met people who fit that sort of description who are absolute b*stards and I wouldn't even give them a lift in my car let alone share my house. Similarly, you yourself have said that some of your best tenants have been less "attractive" on paper but a dream to live with. Don't forfeit the good prospect you have now because something better *might* come along.

If you lose L2 because you're holding out for L3 and L3 turns out not to be suitable, its not fair to L1 to keep using his deposit to cover the gap in rent. It has now become your fault that the room isn't let, not his...

bundly

sonastin:

Not a single word of that tells you what he is like to live with.

That is true for ALL the others and ALL prospective lodgers, all the time. So why single him out for suspicion?

If you lose L2 because you're holding out for L3 and L3 turns out not to be suitable, its not fair to L1 to keep using his deposit to cover the gap in rent. It has now become your fault that the room isn't let, not his...

I disagree. The ONLY reason that rent hasn't been coming in for that room since 1st May is that L1 didn't move in (or start paying me) on 1st, as we agreed. It is his fault and ONLY his fault. I have not prevented him from moving in on 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or any other day including today.

Just because I am mulling over in my mind what to do next doesn't change what L1 has done or end his obligations.

It ISN'T the fact that I am thinking about my other options that is losing me money, it is ONLY the fact that he broke our agreement.

Remember, I have not taken any deposit from anyone else, have made no promise to anyone else. The room is STILL vacant for L1 to move in, soon as he pays the balance on his deposit and a month's rent in advance, which are my standard terms and the terms which he agreed to when he gave me the deposit.

Lastly I won't lose L2 by waiting for L3 because L2 has told me that he is happy to wait until Wednesday to know if his application is successful or not. If he finds somewhere else I still have L4. And if all else fails, I can have L1 on 16th May, or readvertise.

sonastin

I replied before I realised that there was another page to the thread!

Agreed now that L2 has said he is prepared to wait that the position has changed - L3 was singled out as he was the only one you'd described up to the point I'd read. Just wanted to remind you that what someone is like on paper isn't any sort of indication of what they are like in the flesh, and you'd already met L2 and decided he was OK - bird in the hand and all that.

I still stand by the principle of what I said regarding L1 though. If you have the opportunity to fill the room (e.g. you were prepared to let to L2 and he was prepared to take it) and then, through your actions (e.g. putting L2 off so you can interview L3 and then neither L2 or L3 end up taking the room), you cannot keep L1's deposit beyond the date that L2 was prepared to take the room. You are entitled to charge L1 for the losses that you incur in his messing you around but you also have a duty to L1 to minimise those losses. You don't have the right to hold onto his deposit indefinitely while your indecision drives prospective lodgers away but you do have the right to a *reasonable* length of time to decide. After all, it is your home.

And as an aside, I also think that you would be entitled to charge L1 "£75 per week or part thereof" i.e. on day 8, it would be reasonable for the bill to jump from £75 to £150 - none of this £10.71 malarkey. Obviously £10.71 per day is equally acceptable but it wouldn't be unreasonable to do it this way either...

bundly

Thank you sonastin for your further contribution. I do appreciate the time and effort put in by everyone, even if I don't always agree with you :-)

what someone is like on paper isn't any sort of indication of what they are like in the flesh, and you'd already met L2 and decided he was OK - bird in the hand and all that.

I agree with you on this principle. I wasn't 100% happy with L2. His mum came with him and said that she'd spent the last five months "trying to civilise him" after he came home from uni. She added that she'd "almost succeeded". On the plus side I guess that he is used to being guided/nagged by a middle aged woman already, I can just take over LOL.

If you have the opportunity to fill the room (e.g. you were prepared to let to L2 and he was prepared to take it) and then, through your actions (e.g. putting L2 off so you can interview L3 and then neither L2 or L3 end up taking the room), you cannot keep L1's deposit beyond the date that L2 was prepared to take the room.

I understand the logical principle here. But when you say "take the room" do you mean him verbalising his eagerness, or the day he actually starts paying rent? He won't be moving in until 20th May, the date his parents move away.

You are entitled to charge L1 for the losses that you incur in his messing you around but you also have a duty to L1 to minimise those losses. You don't have the right to hold onto his deposit indefinitely while your indecision drives prospective lodgers away

With L2 it makes no difference.If I had taken his deposit last night he won't move in till 20th May. If I take his deposit next Thursday, he still won't move in till 20th May.L4, the woman, is going to be homeless on 14th May.Minimizing L1's losses would entail offering her the room and moving her in on 14th.
And as an aside, I also think that you would be entitled to charge L1 "£75 per week or part thereof" i.e. on day 8, it would be reasonable for the bill to jump from £75 to £150 - none of this £10.71 malarkey. Obviously £10.71 per day is equally acceptable but it wouldn't be unreasonable to do it this way either...

Yes, I see your point. However, I think that charging by the day sounds more reasonable should the case ever come before a district judge. It sounds more as though I am expecting L1 to move in any day... holding the room day by day .... see what I mean?

Thanks again for taking an interest. It's great not to feel so alone and panicky!

bundly

dibblersan wrote: »

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/917993

THANKS FOR THAT --- READING NOW!

Edited to add: hang on a minute-- 1748 messages on that thread! I have doors to paint!

BitterAndTwisted

Most of that thread will be worth your attention. It's very enlightening and most amusing. I'm an official member of the Tufters Fan-Club

dodger1

ffacoffipawb wrote: »

I have used this forum since 2003. You joined 6 years later - who's the troll?

Racist comment reported to MSE Admin.

And I guess he didn't want to share with a racist.

Ignore List

• THE_ROCK84
• bundly

Calling someone a welsher is not racist. Perhaps you should be reported to MSE Admin for being stupid. You can add me to your ignore list if you wish, I've added you to my "ignorant" list.

bundly

dodger1 wrote: »

Perhaps you should be reported to MSE Admin for being stupid.

But being stupid isn't against the rules. If it were, how many people would be booted off this forum?

:j

lostinrates

bundly wrote: »

I don't mind people putting an alternative view, or even criticisng my actions, but I hate being misquoted or wrongly accused. Like lostinrates, above, giving me a dressing down for not letting my lodgers open their bedroom windows, when I have never and would never have such a rule! (ALL the bedrooms are on upper floors and the sashes all open freely. My own bedroom window is left open 24/7.)

For the record, I did not give or intend to give you a ''dressing down''. I'm afraid that has been misinterpreted. I misunderstood and suggested something that would have helped had I understood correctly.

I also hoped I was being helpful, from personal experience, insight to how a lodger in a similar situation to your weekly-commuting-home-owning-professional prospective tenant would feel about your rule list in response to the suggestion that you might consider simplifying it.

for what its worth I don't consider it useful or helpful to give people ''dressing downs'' on internet forums. Noone likes being falsely accused,( including me), or intentionally misquoted but mine was a genuine misunderstanding.

Apologies for upsetting you, I was merely trying to help.

lostinrates

bundly wrote: »

Another left a ground floor window open all night three times (not only for burglars but nullifying my contents insurance) .

I went back to see where I had gone so offensively wrong and it really wasn't so clear that it was not a bedroom so as to be so damning of my mistake was it?

Any way, apologies again for not understanding this wasn't his bedroom window.