My lodger and moving

Scotbloke

Hello! First post as I can usually find the answers to any questions elsewhere on the forum!

Looking for some advice!

In 2014 I bought a flat in Glasgow, six months later I met my partner and he moved in a year after. We then took in a lodger under rent a room scheme (who is great!)

We now need to move to inverness for work and will buy a property up there. We want to retain my flat in Glasgow to stay there a few weekends each month when we visit our families. We don't want to evict our lodger, and because we want access to the house at weekends it doesn't really fit the "buy to let" model, but not sure it would be my "primary residence" to qualify for rent a room scheme?

Has anyone had a similar experience? Any suggestion?

G_M

You risk your lodger becoming a tenant.


As it's Scotland, you'd need to register with the council. And comply with all other tenancy law.


You might also find your tenant could exclude you from your weekend visits.

Scotbloke

Thank you for your reply, can you explain? I don't want to let my property but would like to keep my lodger. Is this not possible?

PasturesNew

In short - a lodger is only a lodger when living with a resident landlord. As your current home will no longer be your primary residence, you are no longer a resident landlord. Without a resident landlord, a person is a tenant... and while he might be happy (at first) to go along with any arrangement you choose to suggest... you will always run the risk that he will be informed of his "rights" to randomly deny you access and lock you out.

There are also issues legally as he'd be a tenant (whatever you and he call it between you) and that has legal obligations and responsibilities .... and then there's the insurance angle.

In short ...call it what you like, but one slip up and the whole situation could have you by the danglies.

00ec25

Scotbloke wrote: »

but not sure it would be my "primary residence" to qualify for rent a room scheme?

correct, it must be your only/main home in which you are resident. You won't be...
https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/property-income-manual/pim4001

"When the taxpayer has more than one home
Whether a property is an individual!!!8217;s only or main residence at any time in the basis period is entirely a question of fact. You should look critically at any claim for rent-a-room treatment for second homes and holiday homes. Normally we would expect the main residence to be the property that is the taxpayer!!!8217;s home for most of the time. In other words, where friends and correspondents would expect to find the taxpayer.

It may not be the property chosen as the main residence for CGT purposes. Nor need it be an owner-occupied property. A rented property may be the individual!!!8217;s main residence.

The main residence test for rent-a-room is a purely factual one: has the residence actually been the main residence at any time in the basis period? The judgement in Frost v Feltham [1980] 55TC10 gives some indication of the matters that are relevant in considering whether a property is a main residence."

that said you'll still get the full £7,500 for the tax year in which you cease to have it as your main home. Read the section on "basis period" in the above link

For the record, the law says:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/5/section/309

and s784 (1)

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/5/part/7/chapter/1

cashbackproblems

what a load of nonsense, if you trust him and he will look after the place what is the problem, it is still your residence.

kiddy_guy

Well it's called the law.

The lodger might be a perfectly reasonable person but there's nothing to stop them from becoming unreasonable.

If they were to lock you out the more will be on their side until you could get them evicted.

unforeseen

And they wouldn't be in a hurry to move out while they pay you lodger rates for a complete flat

agrinnall

cashbackproblems wrote: »

what a load of nonsense, if you trust him and he will look after the place what is the problem, it is still your residence.

All you had to do was look at the ost immediately above yours to realise that the only load of nonsense is what you have posted.

da_rule

cashbackproblems wrote: »

what a load of nonsense, if you trust him and he will look after the place what is the problem, it is still your residence.

This is helpful....:rotfl:

The terminology is king here, it will still be one of the Op’s residences, but not their primary one, which is what is needed to apply for the tax exemption under the rent a room scheme.

Op, there are some other things to consider:
1) What does your current mortgage say about occupying the property? I.e. does your current lender require you to occupy your current home as you main/principle home? If so, you’ll need some form of consent off of them, so you might as well bridge consent to let at the same time (I am sure they would rather have it occupied than empty).
2) Why not give your lodger a tenancy but then take a sub-tenancy out from them for the times you need to come back? You then become a tenant of your tenant. It is a bit messy, but could work.

mije1983

cashbackproblems wrote: »

what a load of nonsense, if you trust him and he will look after the place what is the problem, it is still your residence.

It must be nice in your world where people never fall out and friends never disagree.

When the 'lodger' (who is now a tenant in the eyes of the law) locks the OP out of the property, refuses to move out, sues the OP for not protecting their deposit and reports them for not following the legal obligations of being a LL (not a live-in LL), are you happy to stump up their legal costs to defend all these claims?