Guarantor for only 1/3 of the rent?

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

    Guarantor for only 1/3 of the rent?

    Where 3 joint tenants are jointly and severally liable, can one of them have a guarantor who only covers their 'share' of the rent - ie one third?

    I have assumed not, and in the past insisted that any guarantor needs to cover the whole rent for the property as is the responsibility of any one tenant.

    Needless to say, potential guarantors have politely declined.
    IANAL (I am not a lawyer). Anything I say here is just an opinion, so should not be relied upon! Always check your facts with a professional who really knows their onions.

    #2
    The trouble is: there are no 'shares' of a joint/several rent, at law.
    But G could guarantee one-third of the total, irrespective of which of the three tenants has paid nil.
    JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
    1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
    2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
    3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
    4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

    Comment


      #3
      You and the guarantor may agree any level of guarantee. So there should be no issue limiting the guaranty to, say, 1/3 of any rent/compensation for damage due.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by jjlandlord View Post
        You and the guarantor may agree any level of guarantee. So there should be no issue limiting the guaranty to, say, 1/3 of any rent/compensation for damage due.
        But OP was trying to see if G could guarantee "G's" tenant's one-third only. I'd say not.
        JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
        1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
        2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
        3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
        4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

        Comment


          #5
          Yes - I foresee the same problem. The G would still be reluctant to cover 1/3 if it is not their own child/friend/etc who has defaulted.
          IANAL (I am not a lawyer). Anything I say here is just an opinion, so should not be relied upon! Always check your facts with a professional who really knows their onions.

          Comment


            #6
            If L is letting to T1/T2/T3, each of whom has a guarantor (G1/G2/G3), maybe there could be a Deed between G1/G2/G3 only in which they agree and declare that each will cover only his/her own T's debts. Still, nothing in that Deed would bind L who will still want to make T1/T2/T3 jointly and severally liable for 100% of the rent.
            JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
            1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
            2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
            3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
            4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

            Comment


              #7
              The way to do it is for the Deed of Guarantee to bind the Guarantor only:

              (i) for an specified amount equal to the amount his T offspring would normally expect to pay (i.e. as his contribution to the joint rent - in this case, one third) and no more, and
              (ii) if and when the LL has not already received rent equivalent to that amount from the named T's bank account.

              I have found that most parent Gs are happy with this arrangement.
              'Pause you who read this, and think for a moment of the long chain of iron or gold, of thorns or flowers, that would never have bound you, but for the formation fo the first link on one memorable day'. Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

              Comment


                #8
                The trouble is: each T is liable for all the rent- so each T's G is too.
                JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
                1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
                2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
                3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
                4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by jeffrey View Post
                  The trouble is: each T is liable for all the rent- so each T's G is too.

                  Well, it was the solutiuon you proposed in #16 of this thread:
                  http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums...ight=guarantor

                  It has worked for me.

                  In any case, I do not see why a G's liability should not be limited, even if the T's is not.
                  'Pause you who read this, and think for a moment of the long chain of iron or gold, of thorns or flowers, that would never have bound you, but for the formation fo the first link on one memorable day'. Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Surely guarantor(s) are not just guaranteeing rental payments but all of the tenants joint and several liabilities of the contract too? Wouldn't this make any guarantor liable for the whole contractual liabilities of all tenants no matter what proportion of rent was being guaranteed? Otherwise it becomes messy and unworkable.
                    The advice I give should not be construed as a definitive answer, and is without prejudice or liability. You are advised to consult a specialist solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      What you do is make guarantor y for tenant x guarantee all the tenants' obligations, but include a deeming provision that those obligations are complied with so far as guarantor y is concerned if tenant x pays a designated share of the rent and other sums due.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        I see what you're saying lawcruncher, but doesn't that then suggest "all tenants are jointly and severally liable, apart from tenant X who only has to pay up to his share and no more" ?

                        On the other hand I guess that just releases the Guarantor from any further responsibility, but not tenant x (even though x probably hasn't got any money!) ?
                        IANAL (I am not a lawyer). Anything I say here is just an opinion, so should not be relied upon! Always check your facts with a professional who really knows their onions.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by mind the gap View Post
                          It has worked for me.
                          'Worked' how though: (a) you've been able to get guarantors to sign up, in the belief/assumption that they are only liable for their own tenant's actions; or (b) you've acted as a guarantor yourself under such an agreement, and have successfully defended yourself in court against a landlord who was attempting to make you pay for the actions of one of your tenant's co-residents?

                          I'm guessing (a)... surely unless (b) has been tested, you can't know whether the proposed solution is going to work?

                          It does strike me as odd that somehow this guarantor issue hasn't or can't be satisfactorily resolved... if I were asking a tenant to provide a guarantor I wouldn't expect or want said guarantor to cover all the co-tenants; and as the parent of a university student currently sharing a rented house with 7 others who I don't know from Adam, I would be extremely reluctant to serve as guarantor for her!

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Grrr View Post
                            I see what you're saying lawcruncher, but doesn't that then suggest "all tenants are jointly and severally liable, apart from tenant X who only has to pay up to his share and no more" ?

                            On the other hand I guess that just releases the Guarantor from any further responsibility, but not tenant x (even though x probably hasn't got any money!) ?
                            It works best when all Gs are bound by the same terms with relation to their own 'protegés' (for want of a better word - usually their son/daughter).
                            'Pause you who read this, and think for a moment of the long chain of iron or gold, of thorns or flowers, that would never have bound you, but for the formation fo the first link on one memorable day'. Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Ericthelobster View Post
                              'Worked' how though: (a) you've been able to get guarantors to sign up, in the belief/assumption that they are only liable for their own tenant's actions; or (b) you've acted as a guarantor yourself under such an agreement, and have successfully defended yourself in court against a landlord who was attempting to make you pay for the actions of one of your tenant's co-residents?

                              I'm guessing (a)... surely unless (b) has been tested, you can't know whether the proposed solution is going to work?

                              It does strike me as odd that somehow this guarantor issue hasn't or can't be satisfactorily resolved... if I were asking a tenant to provide a guarantor I wouldn't expect or want said guarantor to cover all the co-tenants; and as the parent of a university student currently sharing a rented house with 7 others who I don't know from Adam, I would be extremely reluctant to serve as guarantor for her!
                              So when your daughter signed up for her shared student house, you did not have to act as Guarantor?

                              And (as already explained), I do not see why an individual G cannot be liable for a defined amount/proportion of the joint debt even if the T legally is not.
                              'Pause you who read this, and think for a moment of the long chain of iron or gold, of thorns or flowers, that would never have bound you, but for the formation fo the first link on one memorable day'. Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X