Paying for overnight guests in rented flat?!

Pixie5740

theartfullodger wrote: »

Apologies Pixie for perhaps disagreeing: If this were a documented clause, agreed by both landlord & tenant, signed etc, why could the landlord not pursue the tenant for his £5(s) due to breach of contract, and probably win??

What about those tenants who sign tenancy agreement saying they will have the property "professionally" cleaned at the end of the tenancy? That's not enforceable. Clauses telling tenants which utility companies they have to use aren't enforceable either. Just because it's in there doesn't make it enforceable.

theartfullodger wrote: »

Also note OP says "flat downstairs". Unless these are "purpose built" flats then, as landlord is in same building he will be a resident landlord as per schedule 1(10) of HA 1988...
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/50/schedule/1/part/I/crossheading/resident-landlords

- and so tenancy cannot be (may not be, legally impossible to be) an AST anyway.

Best regards to all!

Yes that's why I said, "if," a lot. I'm not sure if the OP would be a tenant or an occupier with basic rights regardless of what the document these landlords with 20 years experience put at the top of the agreement.

Their last name isn't Rachaman is it?

Guest101

theartfullodger wrote: »

Apologies Pixie for perhaps disagreeing: If this were a documented clause, agreed by both landlord & tenant, signed etc, why could the landlord not pursue the tenant for his £5(s) due to breach of contract, and probably win?? - The £5 isn't due to breach of contract, it's a contractual charge. But to enforce it the LL would in essence have to stalk their tenant, which is ofcourse a criminal offence.

I can see prohibition of guests is frowned on in OFT356 but not charging for them: That it is a weird condition indicating landlord is a bit (more than usually) a loony is another matter.

Also note OP says "flat downstairs". Unless these are "purpose built" flats then, as landlord is in same building he will be a resident landlord as per schedule 1(10) of HA 1988...
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/50/schedule/1/part/I/crossheading/resident-landlords

- and so tenancy cannot be (may not be, legally impossible to be) an AST anyway.

Best regards to all!

I think the LL could also be accused of running a brothel

always_sunny

Sounds dodgy, where is the studio and how much is the rent? Will you pay CT?
If the studio has its own address/entity then the rule will not be enforceable.

Layla85

The studio has its own address (ie. Flat C, House number, Street Name). It's a big house made up of 3 studios with the landlord living in the rented house downstairs. I'd live on the first floor so would technically walk past their door to get up the stairs to mine. Whilst I agree it isn't enforceable, they could in theory hear me come in to the hallway with someone else, or see them leaving the next day and if they haven't been informed of their presence kick up a fuss.

It just seems mad. I'm not suggesting I'd be having people over all the time (!) but I'd like to think I could meet someone and develop a relationship with them without having to pay my landlord for the pleasure.

always_sunny

Layla85 wrote: »

The studio has its own address (ie. Flat C, House number, Street Name). It's a big house made up of 3 studios with the landlord living in the rented house downstairs. I'd live on the first floor so would technically walk past their door to get up the stairs to mine. Whilst I agree it isn't enforceable, they could in theory hear me come in to the hallway with someone else, or see them leaving the next day and if they haven't been informed of their presence kick up a fuss.

It just seems mad. I'm not suggesting I'd be having people over all the time (!) but I'd like to think I could meet someone and develop a relationship with them without having to pay my landlord for the pleasure.

At worse you would get a Section 21 in the mail at the end of the AST or at first opportunity within the AST.

The question for me would be, whether or not I am willing to put up with that. It's not the £5, it's more the principle of being restricted in my own place. If the beau or belle moves in it's an extra £150pcm! If the studio is £500pcm in Zone 1, awesome location, no bills and / or CT sure, but if it's market rate, keep on looking and you will find a normal one!

Life is too short for all of this drama!

stator

It's very unreasonable but I would never want to share a building with the landlord anyway, so run a mile

Layla85

It's slightly lower than the market rate, so I was initially very excited.

My worry about finding somewhere else is that the place I have been living in for the past three years charges extremely low rent. I'm moving because I'd now like to live alone (the current flat is a 3-bed, very cramped and falling apart). But as far as I can tell, the big leap in price from what I'm currently paying to what I would be paying living alone makes landlords very nervous. Even though my current salary would cover the cost of the rent more than adequately, and my credit score is perfectly fine ,they worry I'd find it a struggle.

Pixie5740

Is that the address used for council tax valuation?

https://www.gov.uk/council-tax-bands

Not that it really matters. Landlords in same building + charge for having visitors, get a no way Jose from me. I'd find somewhere else.

Layla85

My worry about finding somewhere else is that the place I have been living in for the past three years charges extremely low rent. I'm moving because I'd now like to live alone (the current flat is a 3-bed, very cramped and falling apart). But as far as I can tell, the big leap in price from what I'm currently paying to what I would be paying living alone makes landlords very nervous. Even though my current salary would cover the cost of the rent more than adequately, and my credit score is perfectly fine ,they worry I'd find it a struggle.

I'm wondering whether the best thing to do would be to stick out this slightly mad arrangement for 6 months then find somewhere else. At least then I have the higher rent on my record, making it easier to find somewhere else in future.

Cakeguts

I expect that the reason that the rent is lower is because of the extra strange clauses that the landlord puts into the tenancy agreements.

You are not going to find a cheap flat that isn't cheap for a reason. The reason with this one is that the landlord lives in the building and adds strange clauses into the tenancy agreement.

You will have to decide what you want to afford.