Evicting Family Members!

theartfullodger

(IMHO)... That would depend on the terms of the tenancy but, as nothing is written down in your case, those will be hard to prove:

Example:

Mrs L Ord owns 63 Acacia Avenue. She permits Mr T Enan to reside, on a lodger's agreement, on 01/01/2014. On 3/05/2014 she goes to live with her sister Doris in Watford: She still owns the place: She returns 12/12/2014 to 63 Acacia Avenue. Mr T Enan has been paying rent like a good 'un & even cutting the grass & feeding the budgie.

That it is a lodger's agreement does not mean it is not now an AST: She left, to live with Doris for months: It became an AST then. If the lodgers agreement says Mr T Enan gets "63 Acacia Avenue" then she has granted the whole place (**) to Mr T Enan: So she could be excluded and, even if allowed back in, would be a lodger.

However, if Mr T Enan's lodger agreement was for "Room 3, 63 Acacia Avenue" then when Mrs L Ord came back yes it would have become an AST but the rest of the place is still hers to use, as owner not as lodger. However, get legal advice from someone who knows what there are talking about - which usually means not a high-street common-or-garden solicitor for this sort of tricky situation.

Cheers!

** My youngest son was a joint tenant of a flat above a large Barclays Bank near the Thames in London: The tenancy did not say "Top Flat, 63 Harrow High Street" but "63 Harrow High Street": I failed to persuade him to demand access to the rest of his home, his property (oh yes, his property), including the bank vaults & strong-rooms: Would have made an interesting case.