Different types of tenancy agreement - which to use?

summerholiday

What is not above board? You are the one wanting to rent out property although it is not ready to let and have access at the same time.

Mrs_justjohn

summerholiday wrote: »

What is not above board? You are the one wanting to rent out property although it is not ready to let and have access at the same time.

Because the way I understand it from 'googling' is a lodger is someone that is sleeping in a room in a house that you also inhabit as your home, and that isn't the case.

If you are not resident in the house that they are renting a room in, then you could go down the line of 'multiple occupancy' but again this isn't applicable as no one else is going to be occupying it and they are effectively renting 9 out of the 10 available rooms.

Unless I have misunderstood?

paul1964_2

Fire_Fox wrote: »

They should be aware most damp and mould is condensation which can be much improved or resolved by altering lifestyle (eg. NO air drying laundry indoors, door closed and window open during and after showering) and improving ventilation (opening windows daily year round, use an electric dehumidifier). Rising and penetrating damp less often cause mould because salts being drawn through the plaster inhibit growth. As a landlord them having a damp issue would ring alarm bells, will they be bringing their bad habits with them?

Even if the damp/mould is caused by condensation, this is not necessarily down to the lifestyle of the occupants. It may well be that structural problems within the property mean that is not able to cope with the moisture produced by a normal family. For example, if you render over the airbricks in a property, you are asking for a damp problem.

Also, penetrating/rising damp may not cause mould in the location of water ingress, but will increase moisture in the air and therefore increase the likelihood of condensation/damp/mould. Again, not the fault of the occupier.

Fire_Fox

paul1964 wrote: »

Even if the damp/mould is caused by condensation, this is not necessarily down to the lifestyle of the occupants. It may well be that structural problems within the property mean that is not able to cope with the moisture produced by a normal family. For example, if you render over the airbricks in a property, you are asking for a damp problem.

Also, penetrating/rising damp may not cause mould in the location of water ingress, but will increase moisture in the air and therefore increase the likelihood of condensation/damp/mould. Again, not the fault of the occupier.

:wall: Please read what I posted, not half a sentence. For example "much improved or resolved by altering lifestyle ... and improving ventilation" and "Rising and penetrating damp less often cause mould".

If every property had adequate ventilation to cope with an average household's production - including air drying laundry indoors - we'd have few posts about mould and be overrun with posts complaining about how drafty houses are and how astronomical heating bills are. You are talking about litres of water a day. Not sure what a normal family is!

paul1964_2

Fire_Fox wrote: »

:wall: Please read what I posted, not half a sentence. For example "much improved or resolved by altering lifestyle ... and improving ventilation" and "Rising and penetrating damp less often cause mould".

If every house had adequate ventilation to cope with an average families litres of water production - including air drying laundry indoors - we'd have few posts about mould and be overrun with posts complaining about how drafty houses are and how astronomical heating bills are. You are talking about litres of water a day.

I did read all of your post. You made a valid point about the need to keep the moisture level down to avoid condensation.

Perhaps if you re-read my post, you will see I am merely trying to give the other side of the coin, i.e. that the prospective tenant may well be living in a property that is prone to damp due to structural issues, so there may not be any "bad habits" for the OP to worry about.

As an aside, a few weeks ago I had a problem with damp. Seemingly from nowhere, we started to get damp along one wall - we had not started showering in the kitchen whilst cooking in the bathroom with the door open or anything naughty like that. It turns out that the concrete at the back of a drain had failed and water was coming in under the floorboards, which must have been evaporating then condensing along the external wall. A bag of sand and cement followed by a couple of weeks with a dehumidifier sorted it out.

summerholiday

Mrs_justjohn wrote: »

Because the way I understand it from 'googling' is a lodger is someone that is sleeping in a room in a house that you also inhabit as your home, and that isn't the case.

If you are not resident in the house that they are renting a room in, then you could go down the line of 'multiple occupancy' but again this isn't applicable as no one else is going to be occupying it and they are effectively renting 9 out of the 10 available rooms.

Unless I have misunderstood?

You have therefore anwered your question of whether or not you can get access with Tenants in situ yourself.

Whereas by registering yourself as living in the property for say 6 months (people do live full time and part time in properties see MP's official and private homes) in the property you would be able to be at the property as and when you need, whether or not you sit on the bed to do office work or needed to stay overnight.

I do not see the problem shorterm and you would not require special permission from your 'Tenants' and it would give you more flexibilty to enter each and every time builders call on to the property. This until you are able to give them a proper Tenancy agreement.

Fire_Fox

summerholiday wrote: »

You have therefore anwered your question of whether or not you can get access with Tenants in situ yourself.

Whereas by registering yourself as living in the property for say 6 months (people do live full time and part time in properties see MP's official and private homes) in the property you would be able to be at the property as and when you need, whether or not you sit on the bed to do office work or needed to stay overnight.

I do not see the problem shorterm and you would not require special permission from your 'Tenants' and it would give you more flexibilty to enter each and every time builders call on to the property. This until you are able to give them a proper Tenancy agreement.

Don't muddle up rules for MPs claiming expenses with the rest of us in different circumstances or with different organisations. You can't randomly register yourself as living somewhere if it is not in fact your main home in order to evade tax or take away tenants' rights. Your main residence is determined by things like where you receive all your mail, where you spend most nights (unless you work away), where you store most of your personal belongings.

"To be classed as a resident landlord, your landlord must:
use the property as their only or main home (if your landlord only stays in the property occasionally and has another home elsewhere, they probably won't count as a resident landlord); and
have direct access from their accommodation to yours (for example, a landlord living in a separate flat in the same building as you won't count as a resident landlord; a landlord who has separate rooms in the same house as you will).
Your landlord does not have to own the property - you can also sublet a room from another tenant who lives in the property, in which case that tenant will become your resident landlord."
http://scotland.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/advice_topics/renting_rights/resident_landlords#0

Mrs_justjohn

Fire_Fox wrote: »

Don't muddle up rules for MPs claiming expenses with the rest of us in different circumstances or with different organisations. You can't randomly register yourself as living somewhere if it is not in fact your main home in order to evade tax or take away tenants' rights. Your main residence is determined by things like where you receive all your mail, where you spend most nights (unless you work away), where you store most of your personal belongings.

"To be classed as a resident landlord, your landlord must:
use the property as their only or main home (if your landlord only stays in the property occasionally and has another home elsewhere, they probably won't count as a resident landlord); and
have direct access from their accommodation to yours (for example, a landlord living in a separate flat in the same building as you won't count as a resident landlord; a landlord who has separate rooms in the same house as you will).
Your landlord does not have to own the property - you can also sublet a room from another tenant who lives in the property, in which case that tenant will become your resident landlord."
http://scotland.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/advice_topics/renting_rights/resident_landlords#0

Yes that's the information that I found (there or thereabouts...LOL) which is what I meant by keeping things above board. I didn't want to lie to take away their rights or even bend the truth to give me more rights as when push comes to shove I would probably be the loser. I was just wondering whether there was a legal way to cover the 'interim period' until we could give them a SAT.

It looks like we will just give them a SAT. We have established the house is 'fit' to rent out. It is just not the most modern. We accept that we can not come and go as we please as this was only ever a verbal arrangement,but if they go back on their word it is only them that will lose out. If they don't let us in then they will be stuck with the 1960s turquoise bathroom suite and tiles on a roll, rather than a nice new modern white suite, with a power shower. At the end of the day it looks like we can gain access by giving them 24 hours written notice and if they turn out to be a PITA then we can always evict them after 6 months...LOL