Housemate refusing to pay rent

Socajam

Chilli6 said:

If I was the old tenant I would not be paying April's rent either.
She gave her notice, she is leaving as stated. You or the new tenant must pay. The fact you will struggle to do that is neither here nor there, you still need to pay.
This is one of the downsides of sharing rent so be prepared for this to potentially happen again when another wants to move out. 

That's my thought too as soon as I read what the OP wrote.
Also her title is misleading. She is not refusing to pay the rent.  She gave 6 weeks notice and it was agreed upon, someone was found.
Now this person cannot move in until later in April and the OP and 2 other flatmates think it 's the mover's responsibility to pay April's rent - where is the logic in that?

Voyager2002

It was only on the second page of comments that we were given the actual words of the contract. It is very clear from this that the departing tenant remains liable for the rent until her name is replaced by that of the new tenant (at which point the new tenant becomes liable to pay, whether or not he can actually move at the expected time).

While it might be fair for the two tenants to share the loss, if the matter were to go to court it would be the departing tenant who would be ordered to pay.

csgohan4

where's G_M when you need them, oh wait MODS. 

bigmortgage

Legally, the departing tenant is liable. Morally probably not. You all agreed on the new tenants 6 weeks in advance, but failed to get the new tenants to sign before they became delayed. My prefered option would be to split the cost of the 4th tenants between the 3 of you.

greatcrested

aturton0116 said:

greatcrested said:

It is a joint and several tenancy. All 4 tenants, including the 'departing' tenant, remain liable (jointly and independantly) for the full rent until either

1) the tenancy is ended or

2) an assignment is executed substituting one name for another.

Neither of the above has happened.

The departing tenang tenant remains liable for rent.

If the full rent is not paid to the landlord, he can take all 4, or any one of them he chooses, to court either for the arrears and/or to evict (subject to the current changes + whether the courts are actually sitting).

If the remaining 3 tenants pay the ful rent themselves, they could take the 'departing' tenant tocourt for his/her share (subject also to the above)

How is the "share" determine, is it just on the basis of what rent she previously paid (as it isn't written in the contract itself)?
And in terms of the rent amounts being an agreement between the 4 of us, does she have any defence in court if she's saying that we had agreed for us to leave at the end of March? Or does that not really matter for much in this.

The share is whatever you all 4 agreed. The fact that for 7-8 months she has been paying £X into your account monthly is a clear indication that you and she agreed £X.

Since her obligations as a tenant have not ended, nor has her obligation to pay her share. You've not mentioned utility and other bills but her obligations for these also continue (unless they are they included in rent?).

Socajam

I am still of the opinion take me to court.
Even though her name was not off the tenancy, an agreement was reached between the 4 parties, and new tenant found with a with a ready to move in date in April.

[Deleted User]

The landlord will be entitled to S8 grounds 10 on the basis of joint and several liability if underpaid. This legal action will be indiscriminate as to who is individually at fault and eventually would be entitled to recover unpaid rebt and legal costs from whoever has the means to pay. 
Insofar as you may have had a separate contract with her regarding her share, did you accept the termination of that arrangement?

[Deleted User]

Socajam said:

I am still of the opinion take me to court.
Even though her name was not off the tenancy, an agreement was reached between the 4 parties, and new tenant found with a with a ready to move in date in April.

Her liability to the landlord is joint and several for the whole of the rent for the remainder of the two years fixed term.

greatcrested

Poster_586329 said:

This is an illegal term:

"Vacating Tenant must give at least two months notice of their intention to leave to the Agent/Landlord."

A departing tenant only has to give one month's notice, whatever a contract may say.   A contract cannot overright the statute. See here:

"If you are planning on vacating on the last day of the tenancy, you do not need to give the same two months’ notice to the landlord, although you should give the landlord enough notice to be able to remarket the property."

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/advice/renter/managing-your-tenancy/ending-extending-tenancy/

There's not a reciprocity here.  The landlord must give two month's notice, but a tenant only has to give one month's.  So yes she's absolutely free to ignore the agreement and has no liability for the rent.   Stop calling it "her rent" because it's not her rent any more.

You have misunderstood. The clause does not relate to terminating the tenancy. It relates to assignment of one name on the existing, and ongoing, tenancy agreement  with a new name. Usually done via a Deed of Assignment, with the agreement of all joint tenants (both remaining and departing) + new joint tenant, + landlord. The tenancy is not coming to an end.

As such it is a perfectly legal and enforcible term. The LL, and/or any of the joint tenants, can refuse the assignment, and the LL is perfectly entitled to specify conditons for his agreement, such as the timescales specified.

But until such time as the assignment takes place, including the commitment by the incoming joint tenant, the original liabilities remain. The departing tenant cannot just walk away from their contract without being released via the Assignment (or by bringing the entire tenancy to an end for all joint tenants, which is not what is hapenning here).