Landlord causing problems. Please help.

scrummy_mummy_2

sooz wrote: »

It is still an HMO, as the tenants have their own rooms, and their own individual ASTs, but still have to share facilities. Even if their landlord was resident, it would still be an HMO as he's letting to 4 individuals, who do not form one household.

FOUND THIS FROM NLA:
http://www.landlords.org.uk/pdf/HMO%20licensing%20flowchart.pdf

Looks like it is an HMO from this, in this case it is a requirement that the LL or his agents are granted access to maintain communal areas, so changing locks/barring entry with chains breaks the agreement and so should be avoided....wholly inappropriaite for him to be using the shower though!

SquatNow

macaque wrote: »

I am sorry but the more I read of this kind of abuse, the more I realise that renting has to come under much stricter regulations. It is very clear that many landlords today are not fit and proper people to carry such responsibilities.

Or walk the streets unsupervised.

custardy

Evee2000 wrote: »

This one is confusing me. On the one hand he should most certainly be allowing you to have 'quiet enjoyment' of the tenancy. However, he obviously cares enough to ensure that a handyman is undertaking any maintenance work that is needed. He also cares enough to have sent you a letter stating his intentions - instead of just turning up and using your facilities. Is he a reasonable chap to speak to? Can't you just talk to him about the situation and come to some arrangement with him - whether that be 'p*ss off' or perhaps a set time to share the facilities with him that doesn't inconvenience you?

removal off ivy and the like is in the landlords best interest for their property so not all that caring.
seems the LL wants the rent but still treat is as their own property to do as they like

irnbru_2

crispsandwich wrote: »

My appointment at the CAB isn't until next Wednesday.

Why haven't you contacted the Student Union or college/uni welfare office?

TTMCMschine

silvercar wrote: »

Agree with scrummyMummy, this doesn't sound like a House in Multiple Occupancy (HMO) and I bet your AST (if that is what it is!) is for your own room only. You probably have non-exclusive rights over the shared parts.

In the 1980s, sudents had "licences to occupy" rather than tenancies. These gave you little rights other than your own room. People would arrive home from college to find their lounge had been converted into a bedroom.

But surely they would have been people who were signing a contract for the property/room. If the students are liable for damage caused to the property outside their own rooms, surely this affects them?

The people who are entering the property for a shower are indeed using facilities that the students have to pay for, and are not responsible for the state of the property. Therefore all the risk is put on the students shoulders. Not all of the students belongings will be confined to their own rooms (food etc) either. I don't think the LL has thought this one out properly. I have to say i would be pretty annoyed at this myself.

Very important. Check with the insurance company because even if you got some compensation from the LL, you may not be covered in these circumstances. It may be that the locks on your rooms aren't suitable if people are entering the property (i don't know this - i'm just thinking of a hypothetical problem). Ring them tomorow first thing and explain the situation, they will give you the advice regarding this. If they said you weren't covered what would the LL do then?

thesaint

thesaint wrote: »

Partly correct, but the tenant can refuse entry.

If the property in question is not rented out as a whole house, but a room-by-room basis*(As student lets often are), and there is a spare room, the landlord can rent that room to anyone he/she chooses and they would then have rights to use the facilities.

They should then also contribute to the utility bills.

There is not enough information given to give better advice.

Glad to see people have caught up with me.

You must've missed me on here.

olly300

silvercar wrote: »

Agree with scrummyMummy, this doesn't sound like a House in Multiple Occupancy (HMO) and I bet your AST (if that is what it is!) is for your own room only. You probably have non-exclusive rights over the shared parts.

In the 1980s, sudents had "licences to occupy" rather than tenancies. These gave you little rights other than your own room. People would arrive home from college to find their lounge had been converted into a bedroom.

Licenses don't exist anymore in that context. However universities and other institutions have a different legal status when renting out accommodation to students than private landlord.

I've rented from landlords who have had another property on the same road or even next door on 4 occassions. The houses have been rented on a room by room basis. The landlords have never stated when they were doing works (in one case changing a entire bathroom) that my housemates or I have a right to enter the other property on the street.

In fact stating this could be considered harrassment by the landlord. The OP should change the locks on the house but they need to write to the landlord first making it clear that:
a. allowing others who don't live in the house or pay rent for that property to use the facilities without their permission you will consider it to be* harrassment by the landlord
b. allowing the handyman to enter the property without reasonable notice you will consider it to be* harrassment by the landlord's agents.
And if this continues they will report the landlord to the police and change the locks.

Harrassment is both a criminal and civil offence.

LL or their agents harrassing tenants it considered more seriously than if someone else harrasses the tenant. Therefore if the handyman or the other tenants enter the property report it at the local police station as harrassment by the LL, ensure you get a crime reference number and change the locks.

*"you will consider it to be" as until it's tested in a court of law it is not established and noone can argue with your feelings.

PasturesNew

With a HMO, which this is, there are legal limits for how many of each service (loos, showers, etc) there must be for the number of people.

Might be able to quote these minimum standards as making the sharing illegal too.

How many of the following does your property have:
1] separate loos
2] separate showers
3] separate baths
4] combined combinations of the above
5] any rooms en-suite?

How many other people are in the house that's about to invade yours?

Then cross check those figures against the HMO.

If all else fails, buy some cheap nasty soap and spend the evening putting pubes in it, then leave a bar in each shower/bath/sink area.


But I am liking the idea of sending them to the LL's house.

Update: changed my mind about the soap, it's not the fault of the others that they have to come to yours. They're probably up in arms too... GET THEM ON SIDE. Fight the landlord together on this. They are as much victims as you are.

thesaint

olly300 wrote: »

Harrassment is both a criminal and civil offence.

LL or their agents harrassing tenants it considered more seriously than if someone else harrasses the tenant. Therefore if the handyman or the other tenants enter the property report it at the local police station as harrassment by the LL, ensure you get a crime reference number and change the locks.

I am not sure where abouts you live, but in my city, you would have no chance of getting a crime reference number for a maintenance man doing what the OP has described.

I would be inclined to think that you would be hard pushed to even get an incident number.

bclark

I am not an expert on all these different types of rental agreements, I only know the type of agreements I signed when i moved into my three properties at Uni. Each of us signed an agreement for our own room and we were only responsible for paying our own rent (i.e if one person fell behind on their rent it was not our responsibility), but we were all responsible for the shared areas and we all had to pay the bills.

As a result of this the landlord was not allowed access without prior permission etc. I would say that you should speak to the landlord and state that you will not allow these people to use your facilities.