OR Interview - question re tenancy

churchill33

Good morning everyone.

I have my OR interview on Wednesday and I am slightly concerned over the wording in my tenancy agreement and wondered if someone could please advise.

When we made the decision to go ahead with BR we struggled to find somewhere to rent as not only were we about to go BR, we also have 3 children and 2 pets.

A friend came to our rescue, he has a house which he owns outright, it has a separate "granny" flat in the garden. He had lost his job and could not afford to live in the house so he lives in the outhouse.

He agreed to let us move into the house on the understanding that he still needs to list the house as his main dwelling (the outhouse is not listed as a separate address). He has his own gas/elec/water supplies etc in the outhouse and we agreed to pay a monthly amount of rent, the council tax and all the utility bills relating to the house.

However, on the tenancy agreement he insisted on calling us lodgers as he needed to show that the house was his main residence (I think it's to do with the fact the the house and the outhouse are all listed as the same address). My obvious concern is that the OR will think that he is contributing to our expenses and will reduce the amout we can have accordingly.

Could anyone please advise as to the best way to proceed. I am actually very worried about this and not sleeping (I realise I am probably making a mountain out of a molehill), but any suggestions greatfully received.

Kind regards
C33

sniggings

a strange situation.

Are you likely to even get an IPA? if not no worries.

If you are likely to get one then one person sharing the bills is not going to make much difference, 5 of you, one of him, you are allowed any reasonable allowed expenses, so if you are paying all the gas etc and the OR asks for proof, then it's up to you to show that, if you can prove he pays his own bills than you will not have a problem.

Break it down, a 1/6th of a gas bill or water bill is not a lot at all, if it comes to it.

churchill33

Many thanks Sniggings

Yes, we will get an IPA, however you saying about the 1/6th has actually put my mind at rest. As you say it is not a huge amount if we have to go with that - it will be a nuisance as he does not contribute, but it will be liveable.

Sorry I am panicking about nothing I know but I am stressed as the moment, perhaps after Wednesday I will stop feeling as if I am floating and start calming down a bit.

Kind regards
C33

sniggings

if the expenses you present are reasonable the OR should accept them without going into details or asking for bills etc So no need to mention it unless it comes up.

Remeber an IPA is an agreement so you need to be happy with it before signing, if you are not don't sign, if the OR feels they are right and you are wrong then they can apply for an IPO which means a judge rules whether your expenses are reasonable and sets the amounts, don't think this is a bad thing, it takes time to apply for, so gives you breathing room and more work for the OR, the OR would have to be confident they were in the right as the Judge wouldn't look kindly on them for wasting his/her time if the OR was being unreasonable, it is in the OR's interest to come to an agreement with you.

The Judge is just as likely to side with you than the OR.

CIS

He agreed to let us move into the house on the understanding that he still needs to list the house as his main dwelling (the outhouse is not listed as a separate address). He has his own gas/elec/water supplies etc in the outhouse and we agreed to pay a monthly amount of rent, the council tax and all the utility bills relating to the house.

For council tax purposes it would appear that he is currently regarded as the resident owner and you are merely occupiers of part of the property.

There is the question of whether the 'outhouse' should be listed as a separate property for council tax purposes, as a self contained property it probably should be and he is trying to reduce his council tax payments (and possibly avoid planning legislation) by not registering it correctly .

debtinfo

sniggings wrote: »

if the expenses you present are reasonable the OR should accept them without going into details or asking for bills etc So no need to mention it unless it comes up.

Remeber an IPA is an agreement so you need to be happy with it before signing, if you are not don't sign, if the OR feels they are right and you are wrong then they can apply for an IPO which means a judge rules whether your expenses are reasonable and sets the amounts, don't think this is a bad thing, it takes time to apply for, so gives you breathing room and more work for the OR, the OR would have to be confident they were in the right as the Judge wouldn't look kindly on them for wasting his/her time if the OR was being unreasonable, it is in the OR's interest to come to an agreement with you.

The Judge is just as likely to side with you than the OR.

It is worth pointing out that the OR does win most of the cases that go to court as they know the local judges and know what way they are most likely to decide. So the OR will take to court the one's they are most likely to win. The only time the bankrupt usually wins is if there is an untested point of law that the OR needs the judge time rule on.

However that is not time say you shouldn't make your argument to the OR If you are unhappy as only a few cases go to court and by far the most common result is a negotiated settlement where both sides give a little

Mouse1812

Why not just tell the truth? Whilst you all live at the same address you have separate accommodation and separate bills. There is no reason why the OR should expect a contribution from your friend in these circumstances, you are not living together.

I do wonder however with whom is he “listing” the house as his main dwelling? Surely not the local authority if you are paying the council tax. The taxman would only need to know if he had other properties and if he owns it outright one presumes there are no mortgage interests.

If there is an “issue” over council tax for the granny flat, then that is a matter between your friend and the local authority. Not something for you, the OR or others to speculate about.

sniggings

debtinfo wrote: »

It is worth pointing out that the OR does win most of the cases that go to court as they know the local judges and know what way they are most likely to decide. So the OR will take to court the one's they are most likely to win. The only time the bankrupt usually wins is if there is an untested point of law that the OR needs the judge time rule on.

However that is not time say you shouldn't make your argument to the OR If you are unhappy as only a few cases go to court and by far the most common result is a negotiated settlement where both sides give a little

I was making a different point, I wasn't saying one side wins more cases or an equal number of cases, I was making the point that a Judge is impartial, so a BR has the same chance of winning their case as an OR,as I would think most people going BR would see the OR/courts on one side and them on the other, it's not like that, so has nothing to fear from a court hearing. Knowing what a Judge is likely to accept is down to experience not the OR having any influence over the Judge.

I did say that an OR would need to be sure to have a strong case before going down the IPO route.

That was my point, an OR is likely to be more willing to come to an agreement with a BR if they know the BR is willing to go down the IPO route.

CIS

I do wonder however with whom is he “listing” the house as his main dwelling? Surely not the local authority if you are paying the council tax.

I read it as the OP was paying an amount to the landlord for the council tax and the landlord was still registered as being resident rather than the OP.

Mouse1812

CIS wrote: »

I read it as the OP was paying an amount to the landlord for the council tax and the landlord was still registered as being resident rather than the OP.

But why would he want to do that?

The expression “main dwelling” usually arises in connection with principal private residence relief under capital gain tax. In connection with council tax it might be relevant if you were trying to claim relief on a second property, but no false claims fit here.

In any event I don’t think you can assume there is any attempt to avoid council tax. For all we know the granny flat may have been built with planning permission and declared to the local council, no hints were given otherwise.

I’m curious; who does the property have to be listed with as the main dwelling? The use of the word "dwelling" instead of "home" strikes me as odd. I just get the feeling that this is driven by some myth because I can’t see the problem.

Unless of course we are talking about a rent a room tax fiddle,

churchill33

Hi everyone and thanks for your replies. Sorry to not reply sooner but my phone and the internet are playing up!

I can assure that there is nothing dodgy going on, the outbuilding has planning permission, he is not claiming any benefits and is very on the ball as far as declaring our rental as income etc.

The other building is part and parcel of the house as far as I can ascertain. We use the house (he does not enter), and we do not intrude upon him.

I am probably over complicating the simple which is something I have a tendancy to do. I will naturally tell the truth to the OR as I have nothing to hide, I just did not want it to seem as though someone else was contributing to running up expenses in the house and making a payment towards them when this was simply not the case.

Thanks again, hopefully by the end of the week I will feel more settled.

C33