Should my flatmate's partner contribute to cost of bills?

Guest101

baxy wrote: »

I think most tenancy agreements, if drawn up properly allow the occasional 'sleepover' but if it's a more permanent thing you might need to let the landlord or letting agent know.

Again, Christ.

THIS IS NOT SUBLETTING!

The tenant has SOLE and EXCLUSIVE rights over the property.

The agreement can state whatever it wants. The law is very simple.

Guest101

paul_k wrote: »

I would add if you have a tenancy agreement (and you should)
you may be breaking the terms of that.
If you are both buying your flat,well you need to draw up an agreement on how this will work in future,as I have said before you need to all share costs

I doubt it. Either way, and?

OP post housing issues in the housing board. Unfortunately people here have no clue

Guest101

sulphate wrote: »

It's normally the people who live in the property who are liable to pay the council tax, not the landlord.

LL normally pays when it's seperate tenancies in a HMO.

Which is more than three unrelated people.

However this is debated as a single household. On top of this ofcourse - the partner may have their own property where they pay CT ( or otherwise not liable for) and therefore it won't apply

Guest101

fairy_lights wrote: »

Letting rooms in your house but banning your tenants from using the kitchen is just nuts.

Lodgers*

Otherwise yes nutcase

Prothet_of_Doom

It depends on if someone is taking the !!!! when it comes to heating and baths.

System

Suddenly i'm grateful my rent is bills inclusive

I did at one stage end up practically living at an exes, i contribuuted to food and offered to contribute to bills but my bf's housemates wouldn't have any of it. That said i think i got on better with them more of the time than i did with my ex. It caused friction at the place i was renting as i still contributed to bills despite never being there. But that was my choice.

dw1

Telling them they have to pay would have been ridiculous and would not have given me my kitchen back. So I brought in a rule that they either ate out all the time or they had a meal that I prepared and they paid for. They could not cook in their room or i the kitchen or eat in the kitchen.

If I had you as a landlord I'd move out sharpish. Who wants to live in a house where they aren't allowed to cook?

Your wrong. I can explain why, but the basics of it are.

The tenant has sole and exclusive rights and can share with 0-10000000 people if they wish.

'Sole and exclusive rights' means the landlord can't put an extra tenant in the room with you. It DOESN'T mean the tenant can have as many people staying with them as they like. Tenancy agreements can and usually do state a maximum number of occupants, and that's a totally acceptable clause to have.

Going back to the original topic, I had a similar situation a couple of years ago with a girl who moved in to my flat as a lodger. After a week she asked whether it was ok for her boyfriend (who was flying over from New Zealand) to stay for a few days while he sorted out somewhere permanent to live. Thinking it would be a few days I agreed, four weeks later he was still here.

Thankfully they both then moved out of their own accord but those four weeks became steadily more uncomfortable as they went along - it's one thing for someone to cost you money, it's something else to be outnumbered in your own home. The boyfriend was a nice enough guy but it was quite disconcerting having him there (he didn't have a job so was around almost 24/7) and had it come to it I wouldn't have felt confident about confronting them both together about it.

Lesson learned and the way I prevent it now is by having a clause in the lease that lodgers have to start paying double rent if any guest stays longer than 5 days. Not something you could do if you're renting of course but perhaps you could mention your situation to the landlord if they're the listening type?

pennypinchUK

Hasn't this one been done to death already?

Yes, they should make a contribution, and yes, you should talk to both your flatmate and their partner to sort it out.

Kynthia

dw1 wrote: »

'Sole and exclusive rights' means the landlord can't put an extra tenant in the room with you. It DOESN'T mean the tenant can have as many people staying with them as they like. Tenancy agreements can and usually do state a maximum number of occupants, and that's a totally acceptable clause to have.

Are you able to back up your statement with any facts? What can a landlord do if a tenant moves someone else, such as a partner or a lodger, into the property? Nothing other than evict them once the fixed term has ended, but they can do that anyway for any or no reason. If the tenant signed a contract that prohibited lodgers or any additional people moving in then the landlord could sue for breach of contract, however they would only be successful if they suffered a loss. So unless the number of occupants meant that the property now became a licensed HMO with all the costs associated, the landlord has suffered no loss.

Pollycat

Guest101 wrote: »

OP post housing issues in the housing board. Unfortunately people here have no clue

This didn't start out as a 'what rights do I have' type of question.

More a 'I have a dilemma, what do people think I should do?' issue.
Other posters have brought up the subject of 'is it legal to have someone else stay in a flat with 2 tenants on the agreement'.

And - it was actually posted on this board by a MSE mod so they obviously thought it was the right place for it.

pennypinchUK wrote: »

Hasn't this one been done to death already?

I guess the thread will have been 'done to death' when nobody wants to post on it any more.