Renting part of the granny annex

taffer87

I agree its nor normal - doesn't mean its not legal. Plus it is my contention that it is not a tenancy so I will use the term lodger.

I suppose if I don't find reasonable lodgers on those terms - I could install a locked door between my kitchen and rest of the house - which should allay some of my concerns and then they can have a key to the backdoor of the kitchen and use if whenever they like (at reasonable times for e.g. not after midnight to 6am)...when I might set up a burglar alarm.

But if i find a reasonable lodger who agrees to these terms and offers a lower rent as a result, I would be inclined to accept that.

jamie11 wrote: »

Don't try to be clever, allow the tenant the normal facilities. Limiting the use of the kitchen to a couple of (late) hours a day is not normal.

Otherwise join the property to the main house so the tenant has to enter from your front door, then he will be a true lodger.

Search for a 'lodger agreement' do not try to modify an AST agreement.

PasturesNew

taffer87 wrote: »

I agree its nor normal - doesn't mean its not legal. Plus it is my contention that it is not a tenancy so I will use the term lodger.

I suppose if I don't find reasonable lodgers on those terms - I could install a locked door between my kitchen and rest of the house - which should allay some of my concerns and then they can have a key to the backdoor of the kitchen and use if whenever they like (at reasonable times for e.g. not after midnight to 6am)...when I might set up a burglar alarm.

But if i find a reasonable lodger who agrees to these terms and offers a lower rent as a result, I would be inclined to accept that.

With rules like that ... why not just have kids and learn the lines "while you live under my roof ...."

taffer87

hahaha in time...

PasturesNew wrote: »

With rules like that ... why not just have kids and learn the lines "while you live under my roof ...."

taffer87

Numerous things.

Tenancy is much higher risk for me and that too in my back garden.

There are some issues around tenancy - my mortgage and insurance providers are cool with lodgers. If its a tenancy my interest rate can go up by 1%, so not ideal - although that's for letting the whole house so they might not raise it the whole percent but I guess they will. Insurance might go up too but just to be extra safe I don't mind paying for an insurance cover which covers rent scenario too.

I think I can qualify for RAR but don't mind if not as net net it will be the same net tax.

Thanks for the warning re potential trade too, which won't make any material difference either.

To be honest - if I can legally create a lodger relationship then that's what I shall be doing. Its a personal preference. Don't know why I should create a tenancy for no reason if - staying within the law - I can create a lodger relationship.

The cases I mentioned before look very helpful in terms of service provision essentially meaning its highly likely not a tenancy.

booksurr wrote: »

apart from coming across as a LL who will be rather unpleasant to live with, what actually is your objection to creating a tenancy? Is it purely a fear of paying tax?

- If you have a mortgage then you would almost certainly be better off in terms of being able to claim eligible costs for a house share by not using RAR given London costs

- have you read the guide on what constitutes a "divided property" under the RAR rules? http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/pimmanual/PIM4004.htm

- take care with bed linen and cleaning otherwise you could be trading: http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/pimmanual/pim4010.htm

Guest101

taffer87 wrote: »

I guess my argument is:

1- contract - this should have some detrimental value but agreed no legal value - but it wont just be on paper it will be effected in real life

2- the annexe will not be self contained. You need to look at the legal definition of self contained. A room with a bathroom is not self contained. You have repeated your assertion numerous times without any support and I have mine. There is no case law re both assertions that I can find to substantiate either position. I believe sharing of living/kitchen room will mean that the exemption in 3a)2) and 3a)3) of Protection from Eviction Act 1977 will apply..

3- Exclusive use / occupation will be negated somewhat (or fully) by the provision of services by me making it a licence/lodger agreement - not tenancy.

4- linked to 2 - the only cooking facilities that the annex will have will be shared with the main building.

5- the annex is at the back of my garden - all the above + it needs access through my garden should have some additive support

6- and this is new - I could consider removing the shower room from their bathroom too and making a new shower room on the ground floor that is shared at the back of my house or in a shed possibly (which will be easier). In this case the bathroom will be shared with landlord. However, this would reduce rent by a reasonable amount so not my preferred option - but failing all else - the are is such that it will still be a good investment.

7- I could just do air bnb or Mon-Thursday letting

8 - I could just to a student (there is a uni nearby) ...

In 7 and 8, their main residence will be elsewhere.

9 - i could look at holiday letting / bnb type arrangement

Shelter's tenancy checker: england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/downloads_and_tools/tenancy_checker suggests that if services are provided (cleaning, meals or laundry) then the tenant/lodger is an excluded occupier. But it might just be a design fault in their questionnaire.

There are loads of cases re licence and services here: https://quizlet.com/5705536/leases-flash-cards/

I don't think a room and toilet make a self contained flat.

A stand alone building kind of does though.

And what has a students 'main' residence got to do with the tenancy? You really have no clue do you.

Anyway I and others have tried to tell you.

So ignore it, go for it. But be prepared to lose a lot of money if/when it goes wrong.

sorryitsme

Have you explored having foreign exchange students by, that stay approx. 1 week at a time. If your lucky you will have the driver from the exchange or one of teachers who will pay more.


You might have to make breakfast and an evening meal for the students but the adults might like the independence to make their own.


My Father owns an annex and looked at the exchange students along with having a longterm tenant on an AST. He decided with the AST and has rented it for 3 years.

taffer87

Good God.. please research self-contained accommodation/flat/dwelling. There is tonnes of law and guidance. Do you think letting an annex at the back of the garden which is a stand alone building but no bathroom or kitchen facilities (and these are shared with main house) is a self contained flat too? hahaha

Guest101 wrote: »

I don't think a room and toilet make a self contained flat.

A stand alone building kind of does though.

And what has a students 'main' residence got to do with the tenancy? You really have no clue do you.

Anyway I and others have tried to tell you.

So ignore it, go for it. But be prepared to lose a lot of money if/when it goes wrong.

Guest101

taffer87 wrote: »

Good God.. please research self-contained accommodation/flat/dwelling. There is tonnes of law and guidance. Do you think letting an annex at the back of the garden which is a stand alone building but no bathroom or kitchen facilities (and these are shared with main house) is a self contained flat too? hahaha

It has a bathroom, I refer to your earlier posts regarding it being 'ensuite'.

It also has a room which is capable of being a kitchen - currently is a kitchen.

A tenancy, any tenancy, doesn't require a fully stocked kitchen. Just the potential to be such. Ie just because you take out the fridge and the cooker, doesn't stop it being a kitchen.

Anyway you keep arguing. Prove me wrong, go rent it out. But first speak to shelter ( ring them, not check the website ). Tell them the facts and see what they say.

Personally I don't care what you do. Doesn't have an influence on my life in the slightest.

Since your googling so much, and since this would answer some questions- refer your situation to landlordlawblog- get Tessa's opinion.

ManuelG

Forgetting the legalities for a minute, offering any tenant/lodger/cat sitter access to a kitchen for a small window at weekends is a surefire way to attract the kind of tenant/lodger/dog watcher who'll cause far more hassle than the ones who'll treat respect from landlord in a mutual way.

Note, by no means certain, you may luck out, but the probability is as soon as you start trying to whack in conditions and hoops to jump through, the more likely it is you'll find someone who can play the system better than you.

For there's always somebody who can do that, it's just when you meet them, and in what context.

Personally I'd have thought a nice self contained building on tenancy arrangements is an ideal property to be able to pick and choose potential tenants, and get one who may be happy to stay for years, so why try and shift the goalposts?

taffer87

I have explained before that en-suite was perhaps generous. the bathroom access is through the hallway in the annex.

Re: cooking facilities - I only said removing electric stove and extractor fan (and making good the fan outside outlet/plastering) as when I was buying the house this was the condition attached by 2 lenders before they can lend to make the annex non-self containing and having researched various cases etc this seems to be one of the key determinents of self-containing or not. My current lender was however not bothered about it so I didn't take it out when buying.

However, reading your posts it seems you think i will only be removing the kitchen in name. That's not right. I am willing to remove the kitchen sink / and fresh water pipe to the annex as well. In that case the annex will just be a room with a private bathroom through the entrance hallway (where the kitchen was before). There are two entrances to the annex at the minute. One door is garden to bedroom. One door is garden to kitchen and bathroom. There is a connection door between the kitchen/bahtroom area and bathroom.

I am happy to take annex kitchen completely out / including fresh water pipe / sink/ cooker / extractor fan / refloor it / make good extractor fan outlet to outside etc / any structural things needed. Please feel free to suggest what you think it will take to make it non-self containing,

Re: the other problem of kitchen sharing at certain times - my thoughts have evolved as a result of this discussion. The main kitchen/dining room is at the back of my house with an entrance from the garden. Currently there is no door between the kitchen/dining room and the rest of my house but I can put one easily. I can then give the lodger of the annex a key to the kitchen/dining space and effectively this will be shared between us.

--

Leaving all the above aside (which is what I now intend to do now but would appreciate more thoughts advice) - various cases prove the provision of services is sufficient to make it a licence and non-tenancy. However, the right of LL to access must not be in agreement only etc. I have quoted the cases where 20 mintues access for cleaning a week was deemed sufficient for licence.

Guest101 wrote: »

It has a bathroom, I refer to your earlier posts regarding it being 'ensuite'.

It also has a room which is capable of being a kitchen - currently is a kitchen.

A tenancy, any tenancy, doesn't require a fully stocked kitchen. Just the potential to be such. Ie just because you take out the fridge and the cooker, doesn't stop it being a kitchen.

Anyway you keep arguing. Prove me wrong, go rent it out. But first speak to shelter ( ring them, not check the website ). Tell them the facts and see what they say.

Personally I don't care what you do. Doesn't have an influence on my life in the slightest.

Since your googling so much, and since this would answer some questions- refer your situation to landlordlawblog- get Tessa's opinion.