Alternative ways to enforce a Peaceable Eviction

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

    #31
    I guess many factors would need to be considered as to how self contained it actually was, what is beinfg shared, how it was accessed, separate utilities and postal address ? etc.. The article describes a 'granny annex', in the comments I note the Annex could not be a separate building.
    But agree, it does seem a grey area, wonder if the article's described arrangements have been challenged and proven ... reading the case law on Sham Agreements I came across some 'bending' of the law to suit, which obviously was shot down.

    Comment


      #32
      My understanding is that if your AST tenant has taken lodgers and is sharing living space with them, then the lodgers may still have a basic tenancy if they have exclusive access to their bedroom. If it can be shown that they do not, then they may be licensees, but your tenant would risk losing that case in court if the lodgers could show that (whatever was written), in practice they did have exclusive possession of their rooms.

      Comment


        #33
        Yes agreed, both I and the tenant have keys to the room to allow quarterly fire door inspections to be carried out, along with monthly inspections of the other Fire Safety Equipment.
        It has been advised to institute additional requirements to access the room in the Lodger Agreement, moving forward entry to the room will be required to collect and drop off washed Bed Sheets.

        Comment


          #34
          If you are providing laundry services, then that would possibly be enough to make it a licence, but I dont think it would change if they already tenants.

          Comment


            #35
            but I dont think it would change if they already tenants.
            The tenant will include the new requirement (to enter to collect bed sheets) in the lodger agreement for new lodgers, presume a fresh agreement should be signed for any existing lodgers, with the service provided, to remove any question they were a tenant.

            Comment


              #36
              I don't know whether signing a new agreement would be enough to remove their tenancy status. I suspect not, but others may know better.

              Comment


                #37
                Originally posted by DPT57 View Post
                I don't know whether signing a new agreement would be enough to remove their tenancy status. I suspect not, but others may know better.
                I agree that that wouldn't work, you can't just change the status of a tenancy like that.
                If you could then landlords everywhere would be doing it instead of going to court for possession orders.

                You would have to legally evict them as tenants first.
                Then you could take them back as new lodgers, if they still wanted to after just being evicted.

                Comment


                  #38
                  Indeed. After being genuinely out of the property, and their belongings, for a period.

                  I'm in favour of tenants, agents & landlords sticking to the law. I do hope I've done so with the probably 200-ish laws governing my tenancies (two country's laws..)
                  I am legally unqualified: If you need to rely on advice check it with a suitable authority - eg a solicitor specialising in landlord/tenant law...

                  Comment


                    #39
                    Thank you all for your replies, there has been much food for thought here.

                    Fortunately the Lodger has now left voluntarily, allowing the tenant to get on with a peacefull Christmas.
                    Syringe needle covers and a sharps bin were found in amongst other drug taking 'waste' left behind. It could have only gone one way.

                    The lodger has though left a pile of stuff under a cover at the side of the property, attempts to contact are benig ignored. This was unexepected.

                    The Landlord/Tenant put a clause in a letter that the Lodger signed, confirming they had vacated on that day, handed back keys, and that 'anything left in the 'garden' for pick up later at your own risk'.

                    This area to the side of the house is a shared space over which I am responsible, have I or the Immediate Landlord (my tenant) become 'involuntary baillee's' in any way towards the lodgers possessions. Obviously they will not be put out in the street, and will be left where they are for the time being, but do I or the Tenant need to act accordingly to the Interference with Goods Act with regards his belongings, ie making contact (which has happened), wait a certain amount of time (which will probably happen anyway).


                    I agree that that wouldn't work, you can't just change the status of a tenancy like that.
                    Thanks for those opinions, good to know.
                    I guess a court would need to decide if a landlord holding room keys to allow them to enter the room as they please - to make monthly Fire Alarm checks and 3 monthly Fire Door and room checks would suffice as non exclusinve occupation.
                    Moving forward the provision of an extra service will be implimented.

                    I do hope I've done so with the probably 200-ish laws governing my tenancies (two country's laws..)
                    Agree, but, no one man could ever be fully conversant with it all.

                    Comment

                    Latest Activity

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X