Guarantor for daughter's rent

nobbysn*ts

spacey2012 wrote: »

Latest Scam, they will claim damage that can not be proven and each guarantor will get screwed over separately.
They make serious money from this every let.

Personally, I would advise you do not sign it and instruct her to keep looking for a flat that if it does need a guarantor it is not for the job lot, which could be quite substantial.

Good luck with that. You've not been to uni, or know anyone that went, do you?

Mokka

I feel for you. If it's a joint tenancy do other tenants have to provide guarantors, or just your daughter?
You will be legally responsible for everyone's rent if you sign the agreement as it is.
I've seen a post somewhere on this forum about someone inserting clauses into the guarantor agreement limiting their liability- don't remember when- sorry!

MobileSaver

AdrianC wrote: »

The confusion and fear seems to be arising because of the joint-and-several making the daughter liable for the entirety of the rent if her housemates do a runner on her. She's an independent adult. She knows her future housemates.

If she's happy to take that on, and trust those flatmates not to do a runner on her, then that's her lookout.

One of the most naive posts I've ever seen on MSE! :rotfl:

You only need to search through this forum to find plenty of examples where house-sharing students suddenly find they are liable for their housemate's rent when things don't go to plan.

Crucially though, if things do go pear-shaped, it won't be the daughter's lookout but the OP's!

jamesmorgan

From personal experience if the contract is direct with the landlord it is usually possible to negotiate the terms of the guarantor agreement - as a minimum I would recommend that a limit of liability is included equal to the annual rent of the student. If the contract is through a letting agency they typically won't negotiate (as it is more work for them with no benefit). However, it may still be worth trying to negotiate. If they refuse to negotiate you are much more likely to be able to argue unfair contract terms if the case ever came to court (and most student rental contracts seem to contain a variety of unfair contract terms).

It is now incredibly rare to find a student tenancy that does not require a guarantor. All you can do is try to minimise your risk.

jjlandlord

A guarantee for a joint-tenant is not unfair, it is the same liability as the joint-tenant's.
It is indeed possible to limit the total amount of the guarantee.

Actually, if you try to negotiate the liability down but still agree to sign after they refuse then I would think you would be less likely to have a point in court since it would show you knew what you were letting yourself into.

However, guarantees are a tricky area of law to get right, and I suspect many are rejected in court because not correctly executed.

AdrianC

MobileSaver wrote: »

One of the most naive posts I've ever seen on MSE! :rotfl:

Clearly, I was a bit too subtle in assuming the between-the-lines implications were clear. Even my reply in post #20 didn't help you?

splishsplash

JencParker wrote: »

I've been guarantor for both my children while they were at university and never had to supply anything - I simply signed a form saying that I was guarantor. Last time was about 4 years ago so I guess things have changed.

Exactly what I've had to do each year for each of my two daughters for the last three and two years respectively. I'm stunned at the level of information sought and even more stunned that some people seem to think it's reasonable :eek:

gordonbennet

You might find this thread useful
http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?46836-Guarantor-refuses-to-be-joint-and-sevaral-Any-solution-Indemnity-agreement

jamesmorgan

jjlandlord wrote: »

Actually, if you try to negotiate the liability down but still agree to sign after they refuse then I would think you would be less likely to have a point in court since it would show you knew what you were letting yourself into.

It is a complex legal area, but unfair contract terms only tend to be enforceable if it can be demonstrated that both parties did not have the same negotiating power. This can be achieved by trying to negotiate and demonstrating that this was not possible. It is also possible to argue that you didn't realise that negotiation was possible, but this is a weaker defence. Arguing that you didn't know what you were letting yourself into is no defence against an unfair contract term - it is always assumed that you have read and understood the contract.

jjlandlord

This is not a contract, this is a guarantee. Not understanding the consequences is a possible defense.

Moreover, please note that individually negotiated terms are excluded from unfair terms legislation.