How do you get a lodger agreement / house rules paperwork enforced?

JRT404

Hi,

I am thinking of getting a lodger into my house. I will be a live-in landlord. I have downloaded a lodger agreement form from SpareRoom.co.uk. The one thing it doesn't cover is house rules.

If I write my own house rules document and get the lodger to sign it, how do I actually make sure that it becomes legally binding. Do I need a solicitor to "stamp" it to make it enforceable? Or does the act of signing the document automatically make it legally binding.

I just don't want to get into a situation in the future where I have to get rid of the lodger, but find out that the signed documents don't mean anything because I wrote them without getting them legally signed off by a solicitor.

Thanks,
A.

booksurr

a lodger agreement is nothing more ot nothing less than a contract between you and the lodger. As such it has terms which are documented and each party signs to say they accept those terms

what do you mean by "signed off". A signature from a solicitor is irrelevant as the contract is between the 2 parties and has nothing to do with the solicitor

if you mean have I written rubbish and do I therefore need someone with a legal background to check over the terms and conditions and tell me of they will be enforceable, the answer is yes in a legal sense but in reality why go to such trouble. A lodger has few rights and trying to enforce a bogus contract is pretty pointless when as LL all you would have to do in the absence of a lodger agreement is tell the lodger to leave!

drbluebox

booksurr wrote: »

a lodger agreement is nothing more ot nothing less than a contract between you and the lodger. As such it has terms which are documented and each party signs to say they accept those terms

what do you mean by "signed off". A signature from a solicitor is irrelevant as the contract is between the 2 parties and has nothing to do with the solicitor

if you mean have I written rubbish and do I therefore need someone with a legal background to check over the terms and conditions and tell me of they will be enforceable, the answer is yes in a legal sense but in reality why go to such trouble. A lodger has few rights and trying to enforce a bogus contract is pretty pointless when as LL all you would have to do in the absence of a lodger agreement is tell the lodger to leave!

Thats unless the local council knows nothing like what happened to my friends ex LL, took in a lodger the stereotypical moved here with intention to get benefits from the UK, never paid a pennys rent and local council said he was a tenant not a lodger therefore he couldnt be chucked out for over 6 months (6 months plus the 2 months notice period) and if the LL evicted him he would be taken to court, of course the lodger got a free council house out of the situation in a very posh area that people renting privately cannot afford.

G_M

Very sensible to have clear house rules.

Also wise to specify a notice period of a week either way (if your lodger is a nightmare you don't want to have to wait a month).

If the house rules are broken, you discuss. If discussion does not work, you give a week's notice and find a better lodger.

No - you don't need a solicitor.

Now read:

LODGERS (Licencees/Excluded Occupiers)
A lodger (broadly) lives in the same property with their resident landlord, and shares facilities. Unlike tenants, lodgers have few rights.

The Housing Act 1988 provides definitions of 'Resident Landlord' and 'same property' (S31 & Schedule 1 (10).

There is advice for landlords considering taking in lodgers here:

LodgerLandlord (21 tips from solicitor Tessa Shepperson + General information site)

Landlordzone (Various articles on taking in lodgers)

Renting out rooms in your home (Government info)

Rent a Room Scheme (Government scheme for tax-free income from lodgers)

Guest101

drbluebox wrote: »

Thats unless the local council knows nothing like what happened to my friends ex LL, took in a lodger the stereotypical moved here with intention to get benefits from the UK, never paid a pennys rent and local council said he was a tenant not a lodger therefore he couldnt be chucked out for over 6 months (6 months plus the 2 months notice period) and if the LL evicted him he would be taken to court, of course the lodger got a free council house out of the situation in a very posh area that people renting privately cannot afford.

Well if he was a lodger (and council do know the difference) then the LL should've said - yep take me to court, and then be found not guilty.

So he probably was guilty...

booksurr

drbluebox wrote: »

Thats unless the local council knows nothing like what happened to my friends ex LL, took in a lodger the stereotypical moved here with intention to get benefits from the UK, never paid a pennys rent and local council said he was a tenant not a lodger therefore he couldnt be chucked out for over 6 months (6 months plus the 2 months notice period) and if the LL evicted him he would be taken to court, of course the lodger got a free council house out of the situation in a very posh area that people renting privately cannot afford.

nothing you have said rings true

either you do not know the full details or your friend held something back as there is no way a council would confuse a tenancy with a lodging. Therefore your "that's unless story.... " is at best misleading and at worst plain wrong

Dird

Enforce it as Sheldon would, if you need some inspiration on rules: http://the-big-bang-theory.com/roommate_agreement/

drbluebox

booksurr wrote: »

nothing you have said rings true

either you do not know the full details or your friend held something back as there is no way a council would confuse a tenancy with a lodging. Therefore your "that's unless story " is at best misleading and at worst plain wrong

Or you know, he was told the wrong information by the council which landlords on here and elsewhere say happens.

And this was from the landlords own mouth, hes not a bad person but very eccentric, he even showed me the letters.

Why do people in this day and age still have the mentality that someone is wrong or lying because it doesnt sound right.

Yes I dont know the whole situation but I think the problem was he gave them a edited tenancy agreement (edited to say they are lodgers and things removed) so council said he had an "tenancy agreement" therefore was a tenant even though it was LLs home.

Guest101 wrote: »

Well if he was a lodger (and council do know the difference) then the LL should've said - yep take me to court, and then be found not guilty.

So he probably was guilty...

Whom? the LL or the lodger? I cant remember the reasons he said but he didnt want to risk it even if he was right.

And I guess the other lodgers in the house (was like a 5 bedroom house) who all disliked that lodget and said he used to be abusive, steal things, come back drunk at all hours were wrong too?

[Deleted User]

The fact that the LL used an edited tenancy agreement was enough to make it a tenancy. The LL thought he was being clever, but he just confused the situation. If he'd had no paperwork, he'd have been a lot better off and could have got rid of the tenant in a day.

How the tenant behaved does not prove your point, just that he was a bit of a yobbo. If what you say is true. We don't know either way.

But this is someone else's thread.., if you have important points to make, you know what to do!

Pixie5740

drbluebox, I see from your other thread that you're in Glasgow. Be aware that housing law in Scotland is quite different to housing law south of the border and housing law across the water in Northern Ireland.

Lodger is a generic term, in Scotland the person living with your friend would have been a common law tenant (they have more rights than "lodgers" in England) but by using a tenancy agreement then at best your friend could have given the lodger the rights of a Short Assured Tenancy and at worst an Assured Tenancy. :eek: I hope it's all sorted now though.

Anyway this has gone a bit off tangent and I think G_M has given the OP all the information he/she needs.

Guest101

drbluebox wrote: »

Or you know, he was told the wrong information by the council which landlords on here and elsewhere say happens. - If you ask the traffic warden maybe, but speak to the tenant relations officer.

And this was from the landlords own mouth, hes not a bad person but very eccentric, he even showed me the letters. - eccentric, so he made his agreement overly complicated?

Why do people in this day and age still have the mentality that someone is wrong or lying because it doesnt sound right. - because that's what it is 99.9% of the time.

Yes I dont know the whole situation but I think the problem was he gave them a edited tenancy agreement (edited to say they are lodgers and things removed) so council said he had an "tenancy agreement" therefore was a tenant even though it was LLs home. - Ah so he granted them tenants rights?



Whom? the LL or the lodger? I cant remember the reasons he said but he didnt want to risk it even if he was right. - The LL. -if this was a lodger, then he had no risk. councils dont get this stuff wrong, theyre usually the biggest lls in the area!

And I guess the other lodgers in the house (was like a 5 bedroom house) who all disliked that lodget and said he used to be abusive, steal things, come back drunk at all hours were wrong too?

No idea, maybe, maybe not. i dont care if he was abusive etc. its no relevent to whether he was a tenant or a lodger.

sounds like your friend was running a HMO..