Getting a Lodger

heytoki

Do you live in a city where foreign students go to do a short term english course?

in my opinion students, beteween 15 and 17 years old are the best. You can charge more for your room and they are easier to handle

Guest101

mjoneseyjones wrote: »

Uh huh, that's great but the point stands - hopefully anyone who reads this will notice my comments, do a bit of research into the standard of your advice and think twice before following any of it.

Just to clarify, I still don't know which bits of my advice you feel are wrong. And since you are unwilling to expand on this, I will just clarify based on this post.

A lodgers agreement is a contract, it is binding on both parties, not just the lodger.

Since there is very little statutory governance if lodgers agreements, rights are gained by contract.

In this case the lodger will have gained the right to receive one months notice. And LL the same.

The LL would be entitled to sue for the full month, if the lodger left giving little or no notice.

The lodger is entitled to do the same, unless another clause prevents this. This may be subject to laws regarding unfair terms in contracts.

A clause simply stating that the lodger will receive no notice if there is criminal activity could be construed to be an unfair term. More specific terms may be more easily enforced. For example, a term stating that use of illegal drugs on the property would render the notice period to be one hour, or one day, could be reasonable.

The problem with the broad term is what qualifies as criminal activity, if the lodge gives the landlord a lift, but exceeds the speed limit, would this be sufficient? Would the accusation of criminal activity by a 3rd party be sufficient? I would argue that criminal activity would mean the lodger was convicted, or accepted a caution, for a criminal act. This would eliminate any doubt as to whether criminal activity had taken place.

If the LL did remove the tenant without citing a specific clause, they could be deemed to be in breach of contract, the lodger would then be at liberty to seek to recoup their losses, I suspect strongly a court would agree with this.

Now all court cases are different, but given that lodgers agreements are governed more by contract law than housing law, breach of contract is not good for either party.

I'm not suggesting that LL should tolerate criminal behaviour. I'm saying that careful navigation of the contract and the law is required

kinger101

Oakdene wrote: »

Don't forget you can claim Rent a Room tax relief...

If the rent is under £4,250 a year, you don't actually need to "claim" the relief. It's automatic.

Argghhh

how would they know you had a lodger if you didnt claim it?

kinger101

Argghhh wrote: »

how would they know you had a lodger if you didnt claim it?

They only want to know if you are above the threshold. Why would they want to know if there is no extra tax due?

gazter

adhara wrote: »

Unlikely, but they will have a case! At the very least, there must be the mandatory one week notice, regardless of what you agree with them.

Which 'mandatory' would that be? All that is required is 'reasonable'. In the case of feeling threatened or any criminal activity theyll be out there and then.

Guest101

gazter wrote: »

Which 'mandatory' would that be? All that is required is 'reasonable'. In the case of feeling threatened or any criminal activity theyll be out there and then.

Define threatened.

Define criminal activity.

adhara

gazter wrote: »

Which 'mandatory' would that be? All that is required is 'reasonable'. In the case of feeling threatened or any criminal activity theyll be out there and then.

Nope! That would be considered unreasonable to the lodger.

https://www.gov.uk/rent-room-in-your-home/ending-a-letting

If your lodger is an excluded occupier, you only need to give them ‘reasonable notice’ to quit.
Usually this means the length of the rental payment period – so if your lodger pays rent weekly, you need to give 1 week’s notice. The notice doesn’t have to be in writing.

While I accept being corrected about it not being mandatory - unless you have daily payments, the usual lodger payment period is weekly, so your minimum would be a week anyway. So I'm right for the wrong reasons ;D

If your lodger can prove you both agreed to a monthly payment period, and you threw them out one day (regardless of who said what), they would have right to claim against breach of contract.

anniec19

Thanks to all of you for your help. I Think I'll have a chat with the guy tomorrow n thrash summat out between us. I've managed to print off some template agreements so will go through those too. I'll let you know after he's been tomorrow:)

gazter

adhara wrote: »

Nope! That would be considered unreasonable to the lodger.

https://www.gov.uk/rent-room-in-your-home/ending-a-letting


While I accept being corrected about it not being mandatory - unless you have daily payments, the usual lodger payment period is weekly, so your minimum would be a week anyway. So I'm right for the wrong reasons ;D

If your lodger can prove you both agreed to a monthly payment period, and you threw them out one day (regardless of who said what), they would have right to claim against breach of contract.

That website is not particularly informative. Extraordinary considering it is a government website.
Quote:
You can then change the locks on your lodger’s rooms, even if they’ve left their belongings there. You must give their belongings back to them.

Anyone see the issue?