do i have any rights

[woodstock1st]

earlier this year my friend rented a house from a woman who is the girlfriend of our boss. my friend signed the tenancy agreement and i moved in at the same time as a subtenant with the landladies consent but without my name on the agreement. in september the lease was up and she said we would have to move out but then she had second thoughts and then moved a third member into the house with my friends consent. (but didnt renew any tenancy agreement) since then she has been to the house every day to visit the latest member of the household, and it has become blatantly obvious that sshe is having an affair with him. my boss has found out and she has now given us one months notice to leave on the 27 december because she thinks i have told my boss. my friend and i are no longer on speaking terms either because of this. (for the record i didnt need to say anything as it was general knowledge anyway do i have any rights?

[Planner]

Your friend is entitled to 2 full months notice. So what date did the tenancy end in September, as this is the date that will be used to determine what day your friend has to move out. So for example if it ended on the 27th of September (and assuming you recieved two months notice on or before 27th November) the earliest you can be expected to move is 27th January. As you have now been served incorrect notice you options are;

- Wait till 27th December and inform her of the mistake - and that you aare actually entitled to two full months notice ending on the date the fixed term ended.

- Or tell her now of the mistake

- Move out on the date she as requested.

[woodstock1st]

thanx 4 that, bit worried tho as my friend seems ok with moving out as he seems to have got somewhere to go but I havent and bit short of cash to be having to put down deposits and things immediately after christmas. I havent signed any contract with her either.

[Ed999]

If you don't have a tenancy agreement with anyone, either written or verbal, neither with the freehold owner nor with the actual tenant, then you don't have a tenancy.

If you are sharing occupation with the actual tenant then your right of occupation, if any, ends when his tenancy ends.

If you don't have exclusive use of essential cooking or washing facilities, you are at best only a licencee: you are not legally capable of being a tenant at all.

Your friend, too, is probably only a mere licencee, and so has no rights under landlord and tenant law. You cannot call a mere licence a tenancy agreement, and expect to get away with it! It remains a mere licence, and not a tenancy at all.

Two people who are not man and wife cannot form a single household. They therefore inevitably cannot be tenants of a single dwelling: they cannot BOTH of them have the exclusive occupation of it!

By definition, they are sharing it, and therefore are only licencees. A licencee is NOT protected. Only a tenant has the protection of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1988.



Advice & opinions on this forum are offered informally, without any assumption of liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified and insured professional if you have any doubts.

[demon_x_slash]

Originally Posted by Ed999

If you don't have a tenancy agreement with anyone, either written or verbal, neither with the freehold owner nor with the actual tenant, then you don't have a tenancy.

I believe that a tenancy agreement is not necessary - I remember reading somewhere on this same forum that regular rent payments create a tenancy. I'd appreciate you explaining your reasoning for the above.

Two people who are not man and wife cannot form a single household. They therefore inevitably cannot be tenants of a single dwelling: they cannot BOTH of them have the exclusive occupation of it!
By definition, they are sharing it, and therefore are only licencees. A licencee is NOT protected. Only a tenant has the protection of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1988.

Again, would you mind clarifying this, please? My partner and I are not married and we are tenants of the property, not licencees.

[Joa]

since then she (the landlady, I presume) has been to the house every day to visit the latest member of the household

This leads me to believe that the woman did not live at the house. It means in turn that the the friend and the OP may have been "proper" tenants. The OP would have been a fully fledged tenant if he paid his rent directly to the landlady, but even if was subletting from a friend, the same protection would apply.

Two people who are not man and wife cannot form a single household. They therefore inevitably cannot be tenants of a single dwelling: they cannot BOTH of them have the exclusive occupation of it!

"exclusive" in this context means "to the exclusion of others" - who are not entitled to the occupation, i.e. landlord, landlord's agents etc. So people do not have to be in any relationship to form a single household. As for the "man & wife" expression- it is kind of out-dated in age of civil partnerships, co-habiting couples and other house sharing arrangements.

[woodstock1st]

I think i sort of had a verbal agreement with the landlady, even though my friend solely signed the contract the landlady knew I would be moving in as I discussed with her several times in the fortnight before we moved in about things like utility bills etc. Also we had exclusive use of the whole house (untill the third member/boyfriend moved in). I also paid my rent directly to the landlady on a weekly basis

[Nightmare4banks]

woodstock1st,please answer the following question:

Do you stlll pay the rent on a weekly basis to the landlady or not?

The answer to this question should enable me to hopefully assist you further.

[midas..not]

Origionally it was agreed that my friend would pay her and I paid him my share. Since she has been coming round regularly I have been paying her cash on a weekly basis. (since september)

[Nightmare4banks]

Before I post on this thread any further as I am slightly confused here:

Is midas..not & woodstock1st the same poster or not?

[woodstock1st]

sorry bout that, didnt realise my brother hadnt logged off.....

[Nightmare4banks]

woodstock1st,in reply to your posts:

1.As your name is not clearly on the agreement and once your friend's tenancy expires you have now become in my view a trespasser.

2.Having said this one could also argue that by the fact that you pay the landlady cash and she accepts it an implied/unwritten tenancy has been created.This could carry on for as long as you pay her and she accepts your payments.She would have to give you 2 months notice to move out - in the event of her wanting you out of the property.

3.The fact that the landlady has an affair with the other tenant would not reduce any existing rights due to the fact that no new tenancy was created for your friend.Furthermore the moving in date of your friend was prior to the moving in date of this boyfriend/tenant.

4.If the landlady normally resides in another property she cannot claim full main residence rights through the boyfriend in the house that you live in.
She can only have one main residence and anyway she would not want to have to probably pay more than one council tax bill would she?

5.A long as you pay the weekly rent and she accepts it carry on living in the same place.You could ask her for a tenancy agreement or wait until you have enough money and find another property.Please,make sure you have a tenancy in your name this time.For your sake and not ours!

I hope this helps.

By the way,I have a further 2 questions for you:

Do you get any receipts for your weekly cash payments or does the landlady sign a rent book(which she should do by law if the rent is paid weekly)?

The answers to the above questions should hopefully enable me to assist you further.

[woodstock1st]

No unfortunately there were no receipts or rent book. Think im gonna have to bow down on this one and admit defeat, she definately wants me out by the 27th so no chance of a tenancy agreement. Got appointment with council on Monday coz cant find anywhere with deposit i can afford. Thanx for all the help anyway, its gettin pretty lonely at the mo...

[Ed999]

Originally Posted by demon_x_slash

I believe that a tenancy agreement is not necessary - I remember reading somewhere on this same forum that regular rent payments create a tenancy. I'd appreciate you explaining your reasoning for the above.

Again, would you mind clarifying this, please? My partner and I are not married and we are tenants of the property, not licencees.

Demon X Slash, there is a big difference between HAVING a tenancy, whether a written one or a verbal one, and NOT having a tenancy.

A written tenancy agreement is not essential; but there MUST nonetheless be a tenancy agreement, a verbal one, otherwise the occupier is not a tenant. It is possible to have a VERBAL tenancy, which seems to be what you have; but the o/p here has not got even that: he has not made an agreement of any kind with the OWNER of the property.

In your case, the payment and acceptance of rent is EVIDENCE of the existence of a verbal tenancy.

A man and his wife, whether married or not, are capable in common law of being a single household, and therefore are capable of having exclusive possession of premises, sufficient to create a tenancy. Hence the expression "common law wife".

Therefore you do not have a problem; but in any other case, such as the o/p is in, multiple occupation is fatal to the existence of a tenancy.

Nevertheless, a valid sub-tenancy can be created; but it is insecure, because if the head tenancy ends then so do all sub-tenancies. And the o/p only has, at best, a sub-tenancy!


Advice & opinions on this forum are offered informally, without any assumption of liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified and insured professional if you have any doubts.

[Ed999]

Originally Posted by Joa

"exclusive" in this context means "to the exclusion of others" - who are not entitled to the occupation, i.e. landlord, landlord's agents etc. So people do not have to be in any relationship to form a single household. As for the "man & wife" expression- it is kind of out-dated in age of civil partnerships, co-habiting couples and other house sharing arrangements.

No. Exclusive does mean the right to exclude all others, but this is IMPOSSIBLE to do in this case, if the property is in multiple occupation.

Only a man and wife (whether married or co-habiting) can form a single household. Two unrelated persons cannot, in law; and thus they create two seperate households, therefore the property is in multiple occupation. Therefore they each lack EXCLUSIVE occupation of it, by reason of the presence of the other.

This can be overcome by granting a tenancy of the whole building to one only of them, and him sub-letting part of the building to the other. But the sub-tenancy thus created is insecure, as it fails if the head tenancy is terminated.

Also, there may be a problem proving that the sub-tenancy is valid. It will certainly NOT be valid if the head tenancy expressly bans the creation of a sub-tenancy.

It may also be invalid (as against the landlord) if the landlord's consent to a subletting is needed, under the provisions of the head tenancy, if there is no EVIDENCE that it was ever obtained.


Advice & opinions on this forum are offered informally, without any assumption of liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified and insured professional if you have any doubts.

[Ed999]

Originally Posted by woodstock1st

No unfortunately there were no receipts or rent book. Think im gonna have to bow down on this one and admit defeat, she definately wants me out by the 27th so no chance of a tenancy agreement. Got appointment with council on Monday coz cant find anywhere with deposit i can afford. Thanx for all the help anyway, its gettin pretty lonely at the mo...

If there is no EVIDENCE that you made payments direct to the owner of the property, your chances of showing that a tenancy was agreed between you and the owner are slim, but not non-existent.

Such evidence could show, at least, that the subletting was not unlawful.

It might also tend to show that you have a tenancy, replacing that between your friend and the landlord, since it is highly unusual to pay a sub-rent direct to the head landlord.

But if there is no evidence of payments by you to her, it is your word against hers, so only at best a 50-50 chance of the court believing you, if they were paid in cash.

If you are the head-tenant, she must give you 2 months notice to go, and then also get a court order. She may also be required to get a court order if she knows about your sub-tenancy, and has given consent to it. A sub-tenant is still a tenant, not a licencee, so can only be lawfully evicted by a court order.


Advice & opinions on this forum are offered informally, without any assumption of liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified and insured professional if you have any doubts.