Lodger turned sour, can I kick her out sooner?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Lodger turned sour, can I kick her out sooner?

    Hi everyone,

    First post here so please bare with me.

    I am a live in landlord and for the first time i recently rented out one of the rooms in my house. My lodger has been living in my house for two months now. Things were going great at the start but very recently, we had an argument and she became very aggressive and spoke to me in a very rude manner because i asked her to keep her voice down as i was on a phone call for work, and she was on the phone with her mother.

    She has got a very short temper as i have seen her bang on my neighbours walls once on a late sunday morning because they were doing house work, and she is just generally quite rude to people who try to help her.

    I have served her notice to leave the property by the 25th October, giving her more than a months notice as i have a 3 month break clause in our agreement. However i fear that i cannot wait a month, i feel very scared in my own home that if i say something to her, she might react badly and start screaming and shouting again and could turn violent. I feel very anxious being in my own home with her. She has stopped fulfilling her duties that i outlined in our agreement too.

    I wondered if i had any grounds to get her out sooner. Am i able to get the police involved to get her out at all if she refuses?

    Any help or advice is greatly appreciated.

    #2
    I imagine you will need to refer to any agreement you have made with her.A lodger is not a tenant and has fewer rights and enjoy less protection.

    Comment


      #3
      I wonder whether being a live in landlord was a good idea at all? Of course it might look like easy money but it comes with responsibilities, and I wouldn’t know how I would react if someone else asked me to keep my voice down when having a call in a place where I’m entitled to live... just so they can also have a call the content of which doesn’t really concern me; but maybe this is just me and of course I also don’t know the whole story.

      To your point - what does your agreement say?

      Comment


        #4
        Lodgers are fine. But NEVER write lodger agreements with any more than a week of notice each way.

        And if there is a fundamental breach of the agreement (like rent not paid) you can say goodbye with zero days notice.

        You don't sound as if you can point to a fundamental breach - it is rather subjective, and you have rather boxed yourself in with your agreement.

        It is great that people take Lodgers in England., In Scotland nobody with any sense would take a lodger. WHERE DO YOU LIVE?

        Comment


          #5
          ChrisDennison,

          Well you see all I asked her was just to quieten down as I was on the phone with work. It's not a big ask. Just more common courtesy I would think.

          I have mentioned in the agreement that both parties could mutually terminate the agreement at any time. However, I haven't made specific terms for when conflicts arise as such. In the formal notice I gave her to vacate the property, I made reference to the three month break clause in our agreement rather than the 'argument' that we had. I wanted to keep it as civil as possible but as the week has gone by I feel more and more anxious with her being around.

          Comment


            #6
            AndrewDod,

            Note taken. I'll remember this for next time. I guess I just wanted to know that if things did take a turn for the worse and I no longer felt comfortable being in my own house because of her behaviour, is there anything I could do to speed up the process of getting her out?

            In in England btw

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Stan52 View Post

              Well you see all I asked her was just to quieten down as I was on the phone with work. It's not a big ask. Just more common courtesy I would think.
              Understood. Common courtesy is a difficult concept, what is acceptable and reasonable behavior for one person is the opposite for another. Which can quickly escalate if people share a roof. Which is why the concept of a live in landlord is a stupid one IMHO because one side feels like it is (and legally also is) superior to the other party. Which is never a good position to live with.

              I have mentioned in the agreement that both parties could mutually terminate the agreement at any time. However, I haven't made specific terms for when conflicts arise as such. In the formal notice I gave her to vacate the property, I made reference to the three month break clause in our agreement rather than the 'argument' that we had. I wanted to keep it as civil as possible but as the week has gone by I feel more and more anxious with her being around.
              You can terminate at any time but what is the termination period? This will then govern when you can kick her out. If you haven't got a termination clause for specific breaches then that's the way it is.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by ChrisDennison View Post
                Which is why the concept of a live in landlord is a stupid one IMHO because one side feels like it is (and legally also is) superior to the other party. Which is never a good position to live with.
                Disagree with this bit only. That is EXACTLY how it should be. Inviting someone into your home means that you should be in power.
                These arrangements generally work perfectly well and are extremely common -- but if they don't (lodger starts stealing, threatening, raping) - they have to leave immediately.

                If everyone with a home that was too big for them (spouse died so live alone) thought it was a bad idea the world would be a very different and sadder place.

                There are over a million lodgers in the UK... and it is a good thing, and should be a protected thing.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by AndrewDod View Post

                  Disagree with this bit only. That is EXACTLY how it should be. Inviting someone into your home means that you should be in power.
                  Totally agree, although i have never done it and will never do it...... the concept of a stranger living in MY home is one i would insist that I have the upper hand in terms of power, it absolutely has to be this way especially if you live with your family including children, if i felt the person was not right (for any reason) then i would want them out asap.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    I think the answer is you would be in breach of the agreement if you didn't stick to the terms, but in reality if you turfed her out tomorrow there is little she can do other than sue you for breaching the contract and her consequential losses, will she do that? I had this issue some years ago and it resulted in a shitty letter from the council that's all that happened. However if her behaviour is such that it means you feel threatened you should tell her to leave straight away. Or pack her stuff up yourself when she's out, and change the locks. That's what I did.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by Hudson01 View Post

                      Totally agree, although i have never done it and will never do it...... the concept of a stranger living in MY home is one i would insist that I have the upper hand in terms of power, it absolutely has to be this way especially if you live with your family including children, if i felt the person was not right (for any reason) then i would want them out asap.
                      This is an obvious stance to take from the view of a landlord. I guess it looks ‘a bit different’ if you’re on the receiving end, i.e. if you’re a lodger and have to pay for somewhere where you have literally no rights.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by AndrewDod View Post

                        Disagree with this bit only. That is EXACTLY how it should be. Inviting someone into your home means that you should be in power.
                        But you don’t invite them into your home. You charge them for this. You provide housing to them for which they pay. There is no (or little) benevolence involved with this. I agree with you that this should be the balance of powers if this were an altruistic act, but it isn’t.

                        These arrangements generally work perfectly well and are extremely common -- but if they don't (lodger starts stealing, threatening, raping) - they have to leave immediately.

                        If everyone with a home that was too big for them (spouse died so live alone) thought it was a bad idea the world would be a very different and sadder place.

                        There are over a million lodgers in the UK... and it is a good thing, and should be a protected thing.
                        I wonder how many lodgers agree that the way they live is a good thing. But I don’t know the answer to this.., I just know a live in landlord sounds like terror pre-programmed for me.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by ChrisDennison View Post

                          This is an obvious stance to take from the view of a landlord. I guess it looks ‘a bit different’ if you’re on the receiving end, i.e. if you’re a lodger and have to pay for somewhere where you have literally no rights.
                          You have the rights as laid down in legislation (or it's absence) - just as AST tenants do.
                          And you pay an amount which reflects that framework (just as an AST tenant does).

                          If the framework changed, most people would not take lodgers (or eliminate existing ones).
                          To the general detriment.

                          I can't see how it is different to anything else. I play bowls in my local alley -- and I don't have a right to stay after hours.
                          I join my local gym which gives me certain rights but not others.
                          I invite a student into my house to have a music lesson - they leave when the lesson is over.

                          I stay in a hotel. I don't bleat about the fact that I have to leave when my stay is over (nor does that mean I have literally no rights).

                          Bleating about the fact that "I have literally no rights" (when that is rubbish anyway) is called having your cake, paying for that cake, and then wanting to eat a different cake and three cakes.

                          It's not on "the receiving end" of anything -- there is such a thing as free will, free choice, and the benefits that derive from that choice (as opposed to living in a gestapo state). Or Not?

                          Comment


                            #14
                            My God you have a tendency to dramatise don’t you. And what’s going on with your references, first you compare the situation of landlords with that of Jews under the Holocaust, now you’re referring to a Gestapo state,... have you been watching too much Yesterday?

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by ChrisDennison View Post
                              My God you have a tendency to dramatise don’t you. And what’s going on with your references, first you compare the situation of landlords with that of Jews under the Holocaust, now you’re referring to a Gestapo state,... have you been watching too much Yesterday?
                              I'm just concerned that you don't believe in free will.

                              In fact I think you will find that almost all my so called "dramatising" (including your references above I believe) are actually bemoaning the situation of tenants given the pressures placed on landlords, so don't misrepresent it too much.

                              But yes a lot of the stuff is a little way up the thin end of the wedge of a Gestapo state. I actually don't think that is an exaggeration.

                              By the way you actually missed one of my analogies where I compared the definition of human relationships in HMO legislation with the Nuremburg laws. If you have read those laws (and the types of definitions in Apartheid laws) you will understand that there are some important similarities in spirit and in the actuality of it.

                              Some are concerned about the slippage of freedom (and the implications incitement of theft by the state). Maybe others less so.

                              But ACTUALLY in your keen-ness to attempt some ad-hominem, you seem to have forgotten to deal with the response to the point you yourself raised (which was cogent). Eating cakes you have not paid for etc.

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              • Reply to Landlord opening ex-tenant's post
                                by jpkeates
                                Glad it's not just me.

                                I have a feeling it's never been decided, hence the need for the Postal Rule for contracts.
                                But I have no authority for that either.

                                The problem in these circumstances - a letter to a previous inhabitant - is that most of the information on the...
                                30-10-2020, 11:25 AM
                              • Landlord opening ex-tenant's post
                                by DanielM
                                Morning all

                                Do any of you have any experience or knowledge of what to do in this situation.

                                The landlord has been opening the ex-tenant's post and found a cheque and saying he isn't going to pass it on to the tenant because the ex-tenant owes rent arrears.

                                I know...
                                28-10-2020, 10:30 AM
                              • Reply to Landlord opening ex-tenant's post
                                by Lawcruncher
                                I was hoping no one would ask that! I have to go back a long time to when I learned it. I did do some Googling hoping to find some authority, but failed to do so.

                                When you think about it the point of posting is a logical moment to choose because it achieves certainty and is the moment when...
                                30-10-2020, 11:16 AM
                              • Reply to Landlord opening ex-tenant's post
                                by Hudson01
                                I have been in my new house for 4 years now and still get post for the other owners...... they did leave with a lot of debt though !!! And funnily enough no forwarding address with anyone...... strange that. I have found that returning the post to the sender does little and it just keeps coming, i now...
                                30-10-2020, 11:00 AM
                              • Reply to Pre Covid evictions
                                by jpkeates
                                The downside is that, I imagine, fairly often, the landlord thinks that there's no chance of actually collecting anything and doesn't bother with enforcement, possibly thinking the ccj is "enough",

                                I'm sure it used to be the case that you could simply ask the court to register...
                                30-10-2020, 10:32 AM
                              • Pre Covid evictions
                                by nreid
                                My tenant stopped paying rent in August of 2019, and in November a notice was served. Beginning of February a possession order was granted and a judgement for money. Then the lockdown, and you can imagine the rest of the story. Now 13 months of unpaid rent. Am going out of my mind here, and nervous...
                                17-09-2020, 19:56 PM
                              • Reply to Pre Covid evictions
                                by hybrice
                                I was told it affords the Defendant one last chance to comply and pay up between the Order being made and enforcement being taken, not sure how true that is but seems reasonable....
                                30-10-2020, 10:20 AM
                              • Reply to Pre Covid evictions
                                by jpkeates
                                That has always been the case for orders made during possession hearings.
                                No idea why....
                                30-10-2020, 09:30 AM
                              • Reply to Landlord opening ex-tenant's post
                                by jpkeates
                                Other than the postal rule, could you point me at a source to support this?

                                This isn't particularly relevant to this thread, it's been something that's fascinated since it was a discussion while I was studying law that was inconclusive.
                                That was a while ago, but it's bothered me off...
                                30-10-2020, 09:27 AM
                              • Reply to Landlord opening ex-tenant's post
                                by pebblepebble
                                As a matter of interest how long it it acceptable to be expected to return to sender? When I moved here I did it for 6 months then everything that came after that went into the bin. They did have a postal divert (I assume for 6 months as we started to get more post after that time) but some things...
                                30-10-2020, 09:17 AM
                              Working...
                              X