Student house - separate or joint AST

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

    Student house - separate or joint AST

    For a student house, is it best to have a joint AST or a separate one for each tenant. What are the pros and cons for each method ?

    #2
    Originally posted by Nicky View Post
    For a student house, is it best to have a joint AST or a separate one for each tenant. What are the pros and cons for each method ?
    JOINT

    PLUS: One letting to 2/3/4 people. All jointly and severally liable for 100% of total rent (and outgoings, if so specified).
    MINUS: Inflexible, e.g. if one wants to leave. Cannot have differing provisons for individuals. Cannot let to > 4 people.

    SEPARATE

    PLUS: Flexible. Can have differing provisions for individuals. Each can have own guarantor limited to that individual's rent etc.
    MINUS: One letting each, so extra paperwork. More scope for rent defaults.
    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
      Sorry but you can let to more than 4 people on one agreement, it's just that only the first four named can be held legally responsible.

      Also separate agreements are a big problem when assessing dilapidations because it's almost impossible to do so - so one agreement is usually best.
      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


        #4
        Sorry that your're sorry, Paul f, but you're wrong.
        L CANNOT let to > 4 people. See s.34(2) of Trustee Act 1925.
        The surplus people (no. 5 +) can be licensees and can be bound by payment obligations- but they cannot be tenants.
        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
          Originally posted by Paul_f View Post
          you can let to more than 4 people on one agreement, it's just that only the first four named can be held legally responsible.
          What's the point of the others being on the agreement, then?

          Peter

          Comment


            #6
            For person 5+, I'd recommend a Supplemental Agreement between L and each supernumerary person occupying (O).

            L allows O to occupy jointly with T1-4 and any other supernumeraries.

            O agrees with L that O will (jointly and severally with T1-4 and those others):
            a. pay rent;
            b. observe and perform all Tenancy obligations; and
            c. comply generally with Tenancy Agreemment as if O were one of T1-4.
            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
              When I had a situation where 4 tenants wanted to get another person in, AST my contract had a clause that allowed sub-lets, on strict condition that they did not bestow any rights over and above the rights they themselves had. So the fifth person had fewer rights but also fewer responsibilities, and the other 4 were the ones who were responsible for all of the rent.

              It worked ok in that situation, can you see any reason why that would NOT be a sensible approach?

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Surrey View Post
                When I had a situation where 4 tenants wanted to get another person in, AST my contract had a clause that allowed sub-lets, on strict condition that they did not bestow any rights over and above the rights they themselves had. So the fifth person had fewer rights but also fewer responsibilities, and the other 4 were the ones who were responsible for all of the rent.

                It worked ok in that situation, can you see any reason why that would NOT be a sensible approach?
                That sounds OK, except that L has no enforceable rights against person 5.
                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

                Latest Activity

                Collapse

                Working...
                X