Tricky one...

[Bookworm]

Situation:

DD took flat with another 3 girls in August, rent is split 4 ways. 3 girls pay equal amounts, 4th has smaller room, so pays less. Rent agreement is for 1 year, renewable yearly. Lettign agents made it very clear that they are jointly liable for the rent, and that if someone leaves, that is not their problem and the remaining girls would be liable for the totality of the rent, and it is one contract, which they all understood and agreed to.

Now one of the girls is leaving to move back with her parents and is saying that she is not liable for any of the remaining rent after she goes (never mind council tax, etc...).

I think that she is, as far as I am concerned, there is a verbal contract between all 4, and there is no reason the other 3 should be penalised because the 4th has decided to leave. In order to mitigate the loss, the girl in the smaller room will move to the bigger one and take over that larger share of the rent.

Now then, here come the questions:
1 - Obviously, the rent money is not due until each month comes up. Can the girls sue their ex-flatmate now for the amounts still due to come, or can they only do so once the year is up retrospectively? I mean, usually, if you breach a fixed term contract, all monies become due immediately, don't they, so would the same apply here?
'2 - They don't necessarily want the girl to be completely strapped for cash, so if they were to obtain a court order, could they request it to be made so that the girl would have to pay her share monthly until the end of the lease year?
3 - Do they indeed have a case in the first place to go after the girl for the money? (that shd have been the 1st question, really! lol)
4 - The 4th girl said that she had been to the letting agent and "they were going to draw a new agreement", which I don't believe is true, but if it, surely, it can not be drawn unilaterally on one girl's say-so, and without the others' agreement? And even if they did, it wouldn't be valid without the remaining 3's signature, and they could refuse to sign, right? After all, it's no skin off the agent's nose, so I can't see it being true...

Anyway, any answers, thoughts and suggestions are all welcome. DD and the other 2 are really distressed at the moment, so the sooner I can give them some more definite answers, the better.

[smcgall]

I don't know if this will help but when i was renting with friends many years ago. We made it a condition of leaving that whoever left would be responsible for their portion of the rent until they could find someone to take over the remainder of the lease.
All flatmates had to agree to the new tennant and any exsisting house rules stayed.
Just a thought but did the agent not ask for a guarantor for all or each girl as it was their first time letting?

HTH

Stuart

[Bookworm]

Nope. They did all put quite a large deposit down and that's it.

[Nightmare4banks]

Bookworm,please answer the following questions:

1.Is there a "breaking clause" in the existing tenancy or not?

If yes,what is the exact wording?

2.When does the current 1 year tenancy expire?

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

[Bookworm]

Yaye, N4B to the rescue! (I was hoping you'd be round. )

I'll have a look at their contract later and let you know. Thanks, luv.

[MrShed]

Originally Posted by Bookworm

Situation:

DD took flat with another 3 girls in August, rent is split 4 ways. 3 girls pay equal amounts, 4th has smaller room, so pays less. Rent agreement is for 1 year, renewable yearly. Lettign agents made it very clear that they are jointly liable for the rent, and that if someone leaves, that is not their problem and the remaining girls would be liable for the totality of the rent, and it is one contract, which they all understood and agreed to.

Now one of the girls is leaving to move back with her parents and is saying that she is not liable for any of the remaining rent after she goes (never mind council tax, etc...).

I think that she is, as far as I am concerned, there is a verbal contract between all 4, and there is no reason the other 3 should be penalised because the 4th has decided to leave. In order to mitigate the loss, the girl in the smaller room will move to the bigger one and take over that larger share of the rent.

Now then, here come the questions:
1 - Obviously, the rent money is not due until each month comes up. Can the girls sue their ex-flatmate now for the amounts still due to come, or can they only do so once the year is up retrospectively? I mean, usually, if you breach a fixed term contract, all monies become due immediately, don't they, so would the same apply here?

No they would need to sue retrospectively - you cannot sue for money that "will be" owed

'2 - They don't necessarily want the girl to be completely strapped for cash, so if they were to obtain a court order, could they request it to be made so that the girl would have to pay her share monthly until the end of the lease year?

No, for same reason as above.

3 - Do they indeed have a case in the first place to go after the girl for the money? (that shd have been the 1st question, really! lol)

Basically what will happen is that the remaining tenants will become liable for the entirety of the rent. However, the remaining tenants can then sue the leaving tenant for her share - there is no question that they will win this.

4 - The 4th girl said that she had been to the letting agent and "they were going to draw a new agreement", which I don't believe is true, but if it, surely, it can not be drawn unilaterally on one girl's say-so, and without the others' agreement? And even if they did, it wouldn't be valid without the remaining 3's signature, and they could refuse to sign, right? After all, it's no skin off the agent's nose, so I can't see it being true...

If I were them I would not be agreeing to any agreement which kept the (total)rent the same but only had 3 on the agreement - it removes her liability. The tenants have no obligation to agree to/sign a new agreement.

Anyway, any answers, thoughts and suggestions are all welcome. DD and the other 2 are really distressed at the moment, so the sooner I can give them some more definite answers, the better.

Answers above in red. Basically, the remaining tenants will have to take the hit for the rest of the agreement, then sue the leaver at the conclusion of the tenancy.

[blacksheep1979]

I had similar (flatmate did a runner) we chased them up and finally ended up in court. As long as the girl leavings signature is on the contract their will be little problem. Depending on the mood of the court that day you may also get her share of all the utility bills awarded as well. Only trouble is as Mr.Shed says you have to pay first and then take to court after.

[Bookworm]

1.Is there a "breaking clause" in the existing tenancy or not?

No.

If yes,what is the exact wording?

N/A.

2.When does the current 1 year tenancy expire?

28th July 2007.


Tenancy agreement is fairly standard, the relevant part to the current situation says:

"Where the landlord or the tenant consist of more than one person the covenants on ther part in this agreement shall be joint and several."

[Jimbo44]

Might be a silly question (and I apologise in advance if it is) but are the three remaining girls contemplating replacing the (soon to be leaving) fourth? If not, would they as this would possibly solve the problem?

[MrShed]

BW, your answers reinforce my answers I put above. But yes, assignment(as Jimbo has mentioned) would be a good idea in this situation.

[Bookworm]

No, they're not. TBH, at the moment, they are very hurt by the betrayal and selfishness of their friend and I think will take a long time to trust anyone again... They'd rather swallow the difference in cost themselves, and will until such time they can go after the money. Besides, gettign s/one else needs to be approved by landlords, etc... and I think they've had a bellyful of complications at the moment...

[Nightmare4banks]

Bookworm in reply to your posts and in my opinion:

Yes,I am around to rescue!lol!

Now on a more serious note:

1.The rent is owed in FULL to the landlord regardless of the disputes between the tenants themselves - whether it be 1 tenant or the 4 tenants for that matter.

2.As you have been told by Mr.Shed,the three existing tenants would have to sue after the money was spent.

3.As this 4th girl ceases to reside in the property there would be no way to compel her to pay any of the bills or council tax apart of course the rent itself.

4.Should there be the desire to house a 4th replacement tenant - brushing aside the landlord's permission the remain three tenants would need to obtain the 4th previous tenant's consent to remove her name from the tenancy agreement and put the new tenant's particulars on the agreement instead.

The reason for doing this would be that:

What would happen say 3 months down the line and the previous 4th tenant turns up on the doorstep of her previous accommodation housemates and requires to be housed again?

She would still be legally the tenant of the 4th room.The new number 4 tenant would have to give up the room at least.So there would clearly be a bit of a confusion there.Apart of course for any further hassle and potential costs that the other three tenants could potentially be burdened with.

5.The best way forward is for the existing three tenants would be one of the three following options - personally I prefer the third:

1.To have to pay for the property at the moment and sue later for the difference in the rent

or

2.Approach the landlord with the view of housing a replacement tenant.

or

3.Request from the ex-4th tenant to pay her share for the rent owed now.

Why go to the bother later regarding suing her etc?

Because...

I think it is well worth the try plus it will help the remaining three tenants ability to pay the landlord the full rent on time.Also as you said because they have been let down and the last thing the three existing tenants would want is a 4th tenant at the moment.

Also....

The other three tenants should give her a bank account number(avoiding no cheque in the post bull**** excuses!), so that she can credit it in cash on a regular basis.If she is strapped for cash - they should take what is on offer because a court would have the same approach anyway - based on what she can afford.

If she does not pay at all this would be totally a different matter.Totally justified to sue her plus should this matter go to court it shows a judge that the other three tenants have been understanding,
patient and kind towards the ex-4th tenant(maybe against their wishes!) which should give the three existing tenants a better more favourable case.

Update us with the facts and figures around July next year to decide the best course of action then.Who knows?Maybe the ex-4th tenant will have paid in full!

Anyway,I hope you find this information/suggestions useful.

If you have any more questions,just ask.

Keep us posted.

All the best!

[Bookworm]

Thanks to all for the information, I am very grateful.

It all seems very reasonable in writing, doesn't it... And I quite agree with you... except that girl no 4 came over on saturday, collected all her belongings (she obviously had been planning this, as she was cleared out within about 1/2 hour), and said that she had to look after herself first and the others weren't her problem. Hence the very negative reaction of the others, which I personally understand.

Girl no 4 is pregnant, you see, and the saddest thing is that if she'd just sat the other 3 down and said: "Look, you guys, I'm moving out now (she was going to later anyway closer to when baby was due) because bla bla, I'm very sorry", her 3 friends would have hugged her, understood and taken on the additional rent without thinking twice about it... But because she's gone in with the "I'm pregnant, therefore anything and anyone else is not my problem, f you all", now the other 3 are not prepared to let her get away with it... Very sad...

Ah well, I'll pass the news on to the young ladies, and take it from there.

Thank again to everyone.

[MrShed]

You have potentially one issue here. If the tenants do not ask the landlord for permission to get an extra tenant in, and then actively seek replacing the leaving tenant, any claim may fail(or at least partly fail), as they have not attempting to mitigate their loss. Unfair, yes, but the court will look at it as the cost to the leaving tenant could have been reduced.