Money Moral Dilemma: Should our mate cover the deposit lost on our house share after he pulled out?

hazyjo

Ringo90 said:

hazyjo said:

Don't see how it's any different to, say, buying a house, spending money on surveys, solicitor, etc, and someone pulling out. Nothing would be reimbursed.

These sorts of decisions on "what if" scenarios should be made before paying anything. Unfortunately, lesson learned. Try asking, but it's definitely not worth losing a friend over. 

Well, except here there is only one person who pulled out, and 4 more who kept their commitment, so I don't see why it should be their lesson learned?

Yes it would be nice if he paid, but I wonder what contingency plan was in place in case one lost their job or couldn't pay and they'd all moved in. Would they all have been up s-creek? Was trying to say that surely there must have been some discussion regarding what would happen if one person wanted to leave or dropped out. The obvious solution is to replace them and perhaps that should've been explored.

It's not about being nice. It's his duty. If they had gone ahead and rented the property as joint tenants, and one of them lost their job, he would be liable to pay his share in some way, not his mates. They could have chipped in for him temporarely to help him but ultimately he is responsible to pay for himself, not his friends.

The lesson learned would be to discuss 'what if' scenarios before entering into an agreement. Would have thought that someone out of 5 people would have thought to ask 'what if one of us drops out after we've paid the deposit' - I would have thought it a fairly logical question, but maybe not. Perhaps they would have agreed on that person paying for everyone's portion of the deposit. No such agreement was made - so I can't understand those saying he's responsible. It is NOT his duty, just his moral duty.

Plus, the chances are it would be a joint agreement, so one could quite easily leave/disappear/say they're not paying, and the others would [more than likely] be held responsible. Very likely jointly responsible for all rent.

Ath_Wat

hazyjo said:

Ringo90 said:

hazyjo said:

Don't see how it's any different to, say, buying a house, spending money on surveys, solicitor, etc, and someone pulling out. Nothing would be reimbursed.

These sorts of decisions on "what if" scenarios should be made before paying anything. Unfortunately, lesson learned. Try asking, but it's definitely not worth losing a friend over. 

Well, except here there is only one person who pulled out, and 4 more who kept their commitment, so I don't see why it should be their lesson learned?

Yes it would be nice if he paid, but I wonder what contingency plan was in place in case one lost their job or couldn't pay and they'd all moved in. Would they all have been up s-creek? Was trying to say that surely there must have been some discussion regarding what would happen if one person wanted to leave or dropped out. The obvious solution is to replace them and perhaps that should've been explored.

It's not about being nice. It's his duty. If they had gone ahead and rented the property as joint tenants, and one of them lost their job, he would be liable to pay his share in some way, not his mates. They could have chipped in for him temporarely to help him but ultimately he is responsible to pay for himself, not his friends.

The lesson learned would be to discuss 'what if' scenarios before entering into an agreement. Would have thought that someone out of 5 people would have thought to ask 'what if one of us drops out after we've paid the deposit' - I would have thought it a fairly logical question, but maybe not. Perhaps they would have agreed on that person paying for everyone's portion of the deposit. No such agreement was made - so I can't understand those saying he's responsible. It is NOT his duty, just his moral duty.

Plus, the chances are it would be a joint agreement, so one could quite easily leave/disappear/say they're not paying, and the others would [more than likely] be held responsible. Very likely jointly responsible for all rent.

If you agree to split a restaurant bill do you ask "what happens if one of us runs off before the bill arrives"?  Paying a holding deposit is not planning a night out, it's ordering the meal.

Again we don't know how long a gap there was between deposit and moving in, but it's not usually very long.  It's perfectly reasonable to suggest that someone who has made a commitment to rent something or buy something isn't going to say they don't want it between paying for it and it arriving.

Ringo90

hazyjo said:

The lesson learned would be to discuss 'what if' scenarios before entering into an agreement. Would have thought that someone out of 5 people would have thought to ask 'what if one of us drops out after we've paid the deposit' - I would have thought it a fairly logical question, but maybe not. Perhaps they would have agreed on that person paying for everyone's portion of the deposit. No such agreement was made - so I can't understand those saying he's responsible. It is NOT his duty, just his moral duty.

Plus, the chances are it would be a joint agreement, so one could quite easily leave/disappear/say they're not paying, and the others would [more than likely] be held responsible. Very likely jointly responsible for all rent.

Yes, moral duty, no one here is saying they can claim the money anywhere on a court.
To be honest I don't think I would have asked about every possible scenario beforehand. It's fairly simple: 5 people are taking a commitment, knowing that if, say, they ALL decide to pull out TOGETHER, they ALL lose the money. So it goes literally without saying that if only ONE of them is deciding to pull out when others would fulfill the commitment, then he's the only one responsible for losing the deposit, so it's totally logic he should pay for it.
Why should his friends pay despite keeping their commitment? Is it their fault they trusted their friend to do the same? Not only are they left with the inconvenience of having to find a new place because he changed his mind last minute, they should even be out of pocket?
No, there's only a lesson to be learned here: if you change your mind, you deal with the consequences.

LP53

You’re all 106 out of pocket but he will be 531 out of pocket if he reimbursed you all and maybe he doesn’t have much money. 

Its very disappointing but I would put it down to experience if he hasn’t already offered to pay you all back himself.

primrose_penguin

A difficult situation for you all and there is no easy answer. You don't say why he pulled out but it sounds like he got cold feet and felt he could not afford the rent so decided to stay with his parents. Yes he should have thought about that before committing with you all to rent the flat. He has also lost £106 and must realise that because of his actions you have all lost the same, so I would imagine he doesn't feel very good about it. You could ask him to pay you all back for the lost deposit, but if he says he cannot afford to, you have to decide whether you value his friendship more than the £106, and if you do then you will have to let it go. I hope he has apologised to you all. Perhaps if you go on to rent another house you should draw up an agreement that if anyone pulls out they have to refund the cost of the deposit to the others.

Ringo90

I must say that regardless of how you feel about this, it's funny to see how in these situations we always advise the OP to think whether their friendship is worth insisting on the money. If I were the person who is pulling out, I would be the one concerned about losing my friends because of the inconvenience and losses caused to them regardless of the reasons that could justify me. This of course doesn't mean the OP has to insist on getting the money back, however after losing it, he should be the one wondering if this (apparently) irresponsible guy is worth his friendship anymore.

crmism

Seems to me that this is a friend who you all should drop, as he's untrustworthy, though I certainly agree that you should do what you can to obtain payment of the share he promised.

Lizrobson

Your 'friend' should definitely pay up. A true friend would not do such an underhand trick....I'm not sure I would want him as a friend any more.