adding kitchen and renting rooms

cowsnhope

Thank you - it is the kitchen that is the main issues as my existing kitchen is tiny and cannot be made any bigger - if I do this the lodgers would have better facilities than me, which is fine - I quite like living with it.

Thank you all for reading this - I'm thinking that as no-one has raised any alarms that I probably am ok to do this which is a real weight off my mind.

Yorkie1

The fact is that nobody knows for sure. We don't know the current layout of your property, your plans for changing it, and what view your council or the VOA would take. Silence is not necessarily an indicator that all will be fine - we just don't know.

cowsnhope

oh... :-(
I've looked up the VOA who I'd never heard of before and the only bit that seems to be relevant is the council tax section and I think I'll just contact my local office to ask about that, was that what you meant or is there another potential problem?

My house is a two story mid terrace, I think it is Victorian, downstairs has two living rooms a kitchen and toilet; upstairs has three bedrooms and a bathroom. My plan is to put a bath or shower downstairs and a kitchen in the biggest bedroom to turn it into an open plan sitting room.

Is there anywhere else I could look to find this info - I'm not finding anything from general google searches.
Thank you

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

cowsnhope wrote: »

Thank you - it is the kitchen that is the main issues as my existing kitchen is tiny and cannot be made any bigger -

Have you thought about adding a small kitchenette to one wall of the second living room, rather than taking out a bedroom?

Something like one of these....







That way the lodgers keep their own living/eating/dining space, you don't lose a bedroom, and it will almost certainly be less damaging/expensive to install and remove.

cowsnhope

wow - look at those - they are kinda cute. I shall have a bit of a google search for something like it.

Benji

The issue of eviction is a tricky one as the occupiers status is not dictated by what is on the paper, but how the courts interpret the circumstances. The key is the Protection from Eviction Act and whether the occupier is 'excluded' or not.

If they are not excluded, then they have a tenancy and court orders would be required. Your problem is that most tenancies nowadays are ASTs and with an AST it is reasonably easy to get free advice online (it may not always be reliable, but it's free!). This will not, and can not, be an AST and therefore the eviction process, whilst similar, is not the same.

You ask about timescales and cost. With an AST it will take around 5 months from starting the process if your tenant holds on to the very end. The basic cost of such a process is around £285 but unless you know what you are doing then you would be well advised to seek specialist advice - that would double it or more for an AST. For a non-AST then you are looking at more.

cowsnhope

sorry posted same Q twice in error

cowsnhope

Thank you - I found this (please see below) from the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 after reading your message. I'm interested in the meaning of Part 3c. Is this just saying that shared accommodation in a landlords house is excluded as in Part 2a even if the landlord moves out at some point - or is it saying that as this is my home and as I live on the premises and it is not a purpose built block of flats that it is excluded? I think probably the former but I'm not clear.

3A Excluded tenancies and licences.

(1)Any reference in this Act to an excluded tenancy or an excluded licence is a reference to a tenancy or licence which is excluded by virtue of any of the following provisions of this section. (2)A tenancy or licence is excluded if—
(a)under its terms the occupier shares any accommodation with the landlord or licensor; and
(b)immediately before the tenancy or licence was granted and also at the time it comes to an end, the landlord or licensor occupied as his only or principal home premises of which the whole or part of the shared accommodation formed part.
(3)A tenancy or licence is also excluded if—
(a)under its terms the occupier shares any accommodation with a member of the family of the landlord or licensor;
(b)immediately before the tenancy or licence was granted and also at the time it comes to an end, the member of the family of the landlord or licensor occupied as his only or principal home premises of which the whole or part of the shared accommodation formed part; and
(c)immediately before the tenancy or licence was granted and also at the time it comes to an end, the landlord or licensor occupied as his only or principal home premises in the same building as the shared accommodation and that building is not a purpose-built block of flats.

jamie11

To keep it simple, one of the main criteria of having a lodger is that they share facilities with you. Giving them a completely self contained suite will almost certainly mean they are not lodgers.

Lodgers can be got rid of easily, you are setting up an unusual tenancy and you may come unstuck. Not everybody can appreciate the finer points, especially if they're demanding another council tax for the same property.

cowsnhope

ok - I think I'll give up - kinda had a gut feeling that I wouldn't be able to do this. I don't want to risk ending up with people living in my house and not paying rent and not being able to do anything about it for five months or more- if that happened I'd lose my home as I need to let out space to pay my bills.