We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Renting: 6 months up front for a 6 month contract, but still want guarantor?
BigAnnieG
Posts: 28 Forumite
I have a conundrum.
A friend of mine has until the end of this month to find somewhere to rent.
He owns a house outright, currently in the process of sale to be completed in (hopefully) the next few weeks. He has been renting somewhere while his house was on the market, as he relocated for a job that ended up falling through. He's on ESA, has never had debt, or any CCJs or anything.
I have enough savings to loan him the deposit and 6 months rent up-front. I'm not a homeowner, and I'm newly self employed with only a couple of months' income (not enough to satisfy lettings) so cannot be a guarantor.
He doesn't know anybody who is a working homeowner to be guarantor.
He's found a lovely house that is only for a 6 month contract before the landlady wants to sell next year. Perfect! Gives him time to rent while he finds a house to buy with the money from the sale of his current place.
The lettings agent AND the landlady agreed 6 months up front - and today was supposed to be the day the holding deposit was paid. The letting agent turns out to not be the agent, their sister office is - and the sister office now says he needs the 6 months upfront AND someone with a working income because "what if he doesn't leave the property after 6 months".
One house has already fallen through for this very same reason.
My question is: is this a legal requirement? What can be done to overcome any qualms of the landlady? (Not that she has yet to express any herself - it seems to be LA red tape). I don't see why a guarantor is required when the full contract can be paid out.
She already knew he wasn't working, that he is a homeowner, and that the 6 months is up front. The tenancy is only for 6 months and he will therefore be paying the entire contract without any following monthly rent payments required. Their argument of 'what if he doesn't move out' seems silly, because what if ANYBODY doesn't leave after the end of their contract?!
Where do we stand on this?
To clarify, I am lending him the money from my own savings on a written agreement that it is returned when the house sale is complete. He isn't just getting free money
A friend of mine has until the end of this month to find somewhere to rent.
He owns a house outright, currently in the process of sale to be completed in (hopefully) the next few weeks. He has been renting somewhere while his house was on the market, as he relocated for a job that ended up falling through. He's on ESA, has never had debt, or any CCJs or anything.
I have enough savings to loan him the deposit and 6 months rent up-front. I'm not a homeowner, and I'm newly self employed with only a couple of months' income (not enough to satisfy lettings) so cannot be a guarantor.
He doesn't know anybody who is a working homeowner to be guarantor.
He's found a lovely house that is only for a 6 month contract before the landlady wants to sell next year. Perfect! Gives him time to rent while he finds a house to buy with the money from the sale of his current place.
The lettings agent AND the landlady agreed 6 months up front - and today was supposed to be the day the holding deposit was paid. The letting agent turns out to not be the agent, their sister office is - and the sister office now says he needs the 6 months upfront AND someone with a working income because "what if he doesn't leave the property after 6 months".
One house has already fallen through for this very same reason.
My question is: is this a legal requirement? What can be done to overcome any qualms of the landlady? (Not that she has yet to express any herself - it seems to be LA red tape). I don't see why a guarantor is required when the full contract can be paid out.
She already knew he wasn't working, that he is a homeowner, and that the 6 months is up front. The tenancy is only for 6 months and he will therefore be paying the entire contract without any following monthly rent payments required. Their argument of 'what if he doesn't move out' seems silly, because what if ANYBODY doesn't leave after the end of their contract?!
Where do we stand on this?
To clarify, I am lending him the money from my own savings on a written agreement that it is returned when the house sale is complete. He isn't just getting free money
0
Comments
-
Forget about this property and find one with a LL who will accept what you're offering.0
-
That's the trouble, though - he's been to all of the LA in the area (North Wales) and it seems that this is their blanket standard response. The area is pretty rural, too, so properties are limited.
With time now getting so tight, I wondered if there was a way to secure this property, seeing as the LL seems fine with him as a prospective tenant and it's just the LA standing in the way!0 -
Find a property that doesn't use an agent. Openrent is often a good place to check.0
-
0
-
We have both been trying through OpenRent etc but whenever we contact a property they're already let! He has less than 3 weeks to find somewhere and move, I'm trying to persuade him to get a guarantor, as per 3Card's suggestion, but he doesn't see why he needs to pay for such a service.
I do understand his reticence - why pay for a guarantor if he is already paying out the entire contract? He's asked if he could find a guarantor service and NOT pay the rent up front, but having no income (despite a guarantor, if he used a service) means LAs have all said he needs BOTH rent AND a guarantor.
Is this normal? I didn't think this was normal, but I've never tried to rent in Wales so maybe it's different there?0 -
But that's not what he's doing, he is only paying for the first 6 months. There is nothing any LL can do to stop the contract rolling over if the tenant doesn't leave at the end of the fixed term.I do understand his reticence - why pay for a guarantor if he is already paying out the entire contract?0 -
It's a fixed term 6 month contract, she wants to put it on the market again in 6 months' time. If she changed her mind or he wanted to let it while it was on the sales market after that, I can understand needing a guarantor.
But six months rent AND a guarantor seems excessive, especially when he can prove his house is under the sale process, too.0 -
He might find it easier to find somewhere where he can be a lodger rather than a tenant.
Is there a reason why he can't stay in his current rental?0 -
Yes, I was paying the rent and am now moving - he can't afford to rent this place without significantly eating into his house savings (supposed to be for the next house). I'm helping him out with the 6 months' loan as I feel bad about ending the tenancy (but also his house sale was supposed to have been done already and it got delayed by the buyer's mortgage company).
Also, the LLs here are ... the holes of rear ends to put it politely. Plus there is no heating and single glazed windows for winter...0 -
Ok, so you've answered why he can't stay in his current rental but not why he can't look for somewhere to be a lodger rather than a tenant as that would seem to solve the problem of requiring a guarantor?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.8K Spending & Discounts
- 244.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards