Tenants want boyfriend to move in - ok?

Guest101

Guest101 wrote: »

It was an example.

U asked me to explain.

The arguement is very valid.

Good tenants aren't just picked up in the shop. If you have a good tenant the 'lost' rent can be offset by the well looked after investmeny

adhara

Guest101 wrote: »

1: The tenant can give a key to whoever they choose. Bf, neighbour, anyone.
2: learn the meaning of obligation. U mean no legal right. No he doesn't, but that's upto the tenants.
3: no the current tenants have a valid tenancy and can invite whomever they wish. LL has no say on the matter.
4:he would be a squatter if he stayed and they left. Otherwise he's a permitted occupier.

The bad tenant I referred to was if they all left and OP got a new one in

I think you're confusing a lot of the points, which is why your advice is not as sound.
1: The tenant can choose to give a spare key to whomever they choose, but it is rude (and there is no obligation) to expect the landlord to pay for it for a non-tenant!
2: If we're playing 'take pot shots at my English', I suggest you learn how to spell.
3: Again, the tenant can chose to invite whomever they wish (THAT is not the issue...), the issue is your assumption that just because he lives there, he is allowed the same rights as a signed tenant!
4: He is a permitted occupier because the landlord gave permission...

scarletjim, as I have said before, because he has not signed a contract with you, you have no LEGAL obligation to him and he to you. You are not obliged to give him a key (legally or otherwise), or pay for a new key fob (which can happen with some flats), nor accept any input from him (and vice versa) because he has no legal contract with you. Any damage or theft caused by him is both girl's responsibility.

In short, if he wants things, he either needs to sign the contract or pay for it himself.

Guest101 wrote: »

Good tenants aren't just picked up in the shop. If you have a good tenant the 'lost' rent can be offset by the well looked after investment

So it's inappropriate to raise the rent after so many years due to inflation or changing circumstances? pull the other one! I assume you think it's ok to move 10 more people in on a two person rent price for free and expect the landlord to give all 10 people a key each?

Guest101

adhara wrote: »

I think you're confusing a lot of the points, which is why your advice is not as sound.
1: The tenant can choose to give a spare key to whomever they choose, but it is rude (and there is no obligation) to expect the landlord to pay for it for a non-tenant!
2: If we're playing 'take pot shots at my English', I suggest you learn how to spell.
3: Again, the tenant can chose to invite whomever they wish (THAT is not the issue...), the issue is your assumption that just because he lives there, he is allowed the same rights as a signed tenant!
4: He is a permitted occupier because the landlord gave permission...

scarletjim, as I have said before, because he has not signed a contract with you, you have no LEGAL obligation to him and he to you. You are not obliged to give him a key (legally or otherwise), or pay for a new key fob (which can happen with some flats), nor accept any input from him (and vice versa) because he has no legal contract with you. Any damage or theft caused by him is both girl's responsibility.

In short, if he wants things, he either needs to sign the contract or pay for it himself.



So it's inappropriate to raise the rent after so many years due to inflation or changing circumstances? pull the other one! I assume you think it's ok to move 10 more people in on a two person rent price for free and expect the landlord to give all 10 people a key each?

1: I didn't say the LL was responsible. The tenant can get a key cut.
2: obligation and right are very different.
3: again I never said he would have the same rights
4: no, the tenants give permission. The LL has zero say on the matter.

No one has told the OP any different regarding legal responsibility.

I haven't said the LL must provide keys at all.

jamie11

Guest101 wrote: »

Then he's a squatter and the police remove him

That's not so, he would be a lodger of the noint tenant and as such would be entitled to remain until THEY told him to leave.

Their tenancy would continue until they give vacant possession to their landlord.

To be a squatter you would have to make an unauthorised entry to a property, that is now a criminal matter.

Guest101

jamie11 wrote: »

That's not so, he would be a lodger of the noint tenant and as such would be entitled to remain until THEY told him to leave.

Their tenancy would continue until they give vacant possession to their landlord.

To be a squatter you would have to make an unauthorised entry to a property, that is now a criminal matter.

He's not a lodger, he is 1 household with a tenant.

He would be making unauthorised entry as his permission to be there would be ended

Pixie5740

scarletjim wrote: »

1. Is there anything I need to be wary of? Am I putting myself into significantly more risk somehow by doing this?

Not particularly. If the relationship goes down the pooper and he's not named on the tenancy agreement then he'll need to be the one to move out.

When the single tenant has had enough of living with a couple and wants to move out, that would be the time to draft a new tenancy agreement with his name on it.

scarletjim wrote: »

2. What is the best way to structure it? i.e. Should I leave the girls paying their separate halves of the rent to me as they do now, and let them sort it out with him, or should I have a contract with him also? I can see pros and cons - 3 contracts mean it's all official, but alternatively if I leave it as it is, then my contract remains with the two girls who I trust, and if he doesn't pay etc then it's their problem.

Do your current tenants have a joint tenancy agreement or two separate tenancy agreements. I'm going to jump to conclusions and say they have a joint tenancy. This means they are jointly and severally liable for the rent already. If you created a new tenancy agreement with all 3 of them they would have joint and several liability for the rent. So really it doesn't make that much difference.

However, leaving him off the tenancy agreement would make it easier for the girls to boot him out if necessary.

scarletjim wrote: »

3. Should I charge a bit more? Their rent is about 20% lower than the going rate, as they are friends and they couldn't afford much, so I wanted to help them out 2 years ago. If they have a 3rd person sharing, then I'm not sure that 'discount' remains necessary. I don't want to rip them off, and yes I know I can charge whatever I like, but what's the norm in such a situation, if you rented a 2-bed flat to 3 adults rather than to 2, would you charge any more (additional wear & tear etc)?

You broke the cardinal rule about not letting to friends or family but thankfully it seems to have worked out for you.

Since the rent is about 20% below the market rate and hasn't changed for 2 years I think a slight increase in rent, regardless of whether this chap moves in or not, would be fair. I say that as a tenant myself.

jamie11

Guest101 wrote: »

He's not a lodger, he is 1 household with a tenant.

He would be making unauthorised entry as his permission to be there would be ended

He would be lodger of the JOINT tenant. The sleeping arrangement is immaterial.

He would be required to leave after being given notice by the JOINT tenant.
If he does not leave when asked then he becomes an unauthorised occupier...... not a squatter.

Because .....He was invited to be there in the first place.

With respect ..........read and understand the legislation.

scarletjim

Thanks for the advice and discussions on here, these have really relaxed me on this. I will do exactly as advised, leave my legal relationship with the girls and let them sort out the money between the 3 of them. I'll still probably leave the rent for now, but may mention that I will need to increase it a little at some point, maybe in 6 months or so, that way I can see how they feel about that - they're good girls, I expect they will be totally understanding. Thanks again to all.

Guest101

jamie11 wrote: »

He would be lodger of the JOINT tenant. The sleeping arrangement is immaterial.

He would be required to leave after being given notice by the JOINT tenant.
If he does not leave when asked then he becomes an unauthorised occupier...... not a squatter.

Because .....He was invited to be there in the first place.

With respect ..........read and understand the legislation.

Ditto. A lodger has their own room. He is just a permitted occupier. NOT a lodger.

With regards squatting, his permission to be there ends. If he returns after he would be a squatter. Your logic suggests I can return to any previous address as at some point I had permission to be there.

jamie11

Guest101 wrote: »

Ditto. A lodger has their own room. He is just a permitted occupier. NOT a lodger.

With regards squatting, his permission to be there ends. If he returns after he would be a squatter. Your logic suggests I can return to any previous address as at some point I had permission to be there.

I partly agree.

However, if someone has a right of residence then overstaying their welcome does not make them a squatter

Where a tenancy has ended and the property vacated then if the person returns and enters again then I think he would indeed be a squatter but if he had a key he may merely be trespassing.

The law changed only last year and is still being tested.