housemate drama

taram_2

clutton wrote: »

OP say "" since I haven't had a rental agreement there since October" - legally that is utterly untrue.... you signed a binding agreement from July to January and unless you have written agreement from the landlord for an early release, you are legally liable for all of the rent until this month.

the word Fixed Term in your tenancy agreement was the clue

All rent was paid in advance, so the estate agent was happy to take my keys back and sign me off that I left the house in a good condition.

G_M

taram wrote: »

All rent was paid in advance, so the estate agent was happy to take my keys back and sign me off that I left the house in a good condition.

The wording of this could be critical. What exactly do you have in writing?

clutton_2

do you mean all 6 months rent was paid in advance ?

taram_2

G_M wrote: »

The wording of this could be critical. What exactly do you have in writing?

The estate agent has this document, I only have a receipt saying I am paid up and that I got my key deposit back. I'll have to get a copy of that tomorrow.

clutton wrote: »

do you mean all 6 months rent was paid in advance ?

Yup, every penny.

BitterAndTwisted

What's the key deposit and what has happened to your damage deposit? Was that paid by all three of you?

Crikey, I can see storm-cloud on the horizon and it ain't Council Tax

G_M

taram wrote: »

The estate agent has this document, I only have a receipt saying I am paid up and that I got my key deposit back. I'll have to get a copy of that tomorrow.


Yup, every penny.

A written receipt accepting return of the key to the property is pretty indicative of an agreed early surrender, but the wording might be important.

The rent paid in advance, whilst indicating that the tenancy continues, could be explained as the fee agreed for early surrender.

But these situations where LLs/tenants do not clearly agree their intentions in writing are fraught with doubt.

clutton_2

are you talking about a small amount for a deposit for a key for the property, or a larger amount paid by all three of you as a Deposit on the tenancy which had to be registered with a Deposit Protection Scheme

Perelandra

Do you happen to know if anyone else has moved into the property since you left, taking your place? I'm assuming not since you've made no mention of it, but this would also have implications around who had liability for the CT, and whether or not an AST was still in place.

Overall, though, you've had the right advice in the above posts. If the council tell you you owe CT after explaining the situation, pay it. If the court orders you to pay for the internet bill, pay it. Under no circumstances pay anything directly to this ex-housemate unless required to by the court.

EDIT:

Below calculations show what your CT liability might be, and it's actually very low- less than she will be asking you for.

As has been pointed out above, CT is normally paid over 10 months (April to January), for each 12 month period. This means that part of the bill you pay each month also includes a payment for Feb and March, which would ordinarily have been refunded had your liability to pay CT ended at the end of January.

So *worst case*, you are liable from July to Jan for CT (7 months. In practice it is likely to be only 6, but this is worst case scenario).

If the annual Council Tax bill for the property is £840, this would mean that the monthly bill would be £84 (£840/12), but the monthly rate on the property is only £70 (£840/12). So you owe £70 for each month you have the CT liability, but have to physically pay £84 for 10 months of the year.

Between July and January, your liability is therefore £70*7 months / 2 tenants = £245.

However, the amount you will have paid is £84*5 months / 2 tenants = £210, so worst case you owe £35.

More likely, but still prudently, due to the dates involved, you're actually only liable for 6 months worth of CT- that is, £70*6 months / 2 tenants = £210.

So, if you are liable for 6 months of CT, and have actually paid for 5 full months, you've actually already paid the full amount you owe! The ex-housemate will have forgotten to include the refund that would have been due if the property had been vacated at the end of the AST.

I don't think you have anything to worry about on the CT front.

taram_2

Well it's all sorted...I think

Perelandra you were bang on, I popped into the council, they say I'm actually overpaid by 14 pounds even paying to the last day of the lease :P Her boyfriend lives there too now, but he's not on the bill, she's claiming single person's allowance.

Also, found old plusnet bill which says she paid the first month about three days after I moved in. I paid all house insurance and tv licence, which came to a lot more a month, so we had called it even. Hope this stops this going to court, seems crazy

Perelandra

Good news on the CT front. :T


As for the boyfriend moving in, this clearly has a few implications.

Morally, I would not feel the need to pay any more than anything I had to, since doing so would be subsiding him.

Just a thought- if he is now officially living there (i.e. as more than as a "guest" of your ex-housemate), then it is possible that there is a new AST in place, or that he is now included on the existing AST. If he has now become a tenant in this way, it would be in your interest to learn when that tenancy came into force.

Your Landlord cannot charge for two different tenancies at the same time. So if you had paid rent to the end of your old AST, but the new agreement had (say) a 1-month overlap, you will be due a 1-month refund of the rent you have paid (probably less the costs of finding the new tenant, but as this is her boyfriend I expect these to be minimal).



Regardless of the tenancy status:

If this is the boyfriend's main home (i.e. he is not liable for CT elsewhere) and

If he has no disregards (for example, being a student)

Then he (and your ex-housemate) are responsible for paying the CT from the date he ceased to have a main home elsewhere (probably the date he moved in). Under these circumstances, she cannot claim the single person's discount, even if he is staying there as a guest.