Am I complying with my tenancy agreement?

[Beakermeep83]

Hello,

 

Right will start this post with explaining my living arrangements.

 

I signed a 12 month contract in October with my friend for a 3 bed property. She has a 4yr old son. It was only mine and hers name put on the agreement. I agreed to let them have a room each and I'd have the 3rd but that we would still split the rent and all bills in half.

 

We are now 5 months into the contract.

 

I have recently got into a relationship and admittedly my boyfriend has been staying over 4 to 5 times a week. However, he never comes round until about 20:30 and is gone by lunch the next day and we always stay in my room.

 

He doesn't contribute towards rent and bills but does buy the toilet rolls, cleaning products, milk, squash etc.

 

I have read through my contract and it doesn't state anywhere re restrictions on having people stay over.

 

I have today had a text from my housemate stating that she has got legal advice and my boyfriend is classed as living here and she doesn't want that so is going to take it further to stop it happening.

 

Is she correct and can anything be done?

[Planner]

Its a very difficult situation. On one hand you want to spend nights with your BF and on the other hand she has now expressed that she doesnt want your BF to stay over. What to do?

 

I suspect she hasnt taken any legal advice and I doubt that your BF is classed as living there. I also doubt that there is anything that she can do about the situation. However, none of this changes the fact that there is still a situation that you both need to resolve. Compromise is going to be the name of the game. If one of you refuses to, then its likley to be a very awkward seven months!

[Beakermeep83]

Thank you for your comments.

 

Unfortunately, she is beyond compromise. She just seems content to send me immature text messages.

 

She has different men over several times a week (not for me to judge) and I have never said anything re this.

 

I am constantly being told it's because she is jealous of my relationship.

 

Anyway, all of that aside I am just struggling to get a definitive answer from anyone re whether or not she can do anything legally.

 

Does anyone know?

[Planner]

No, theres nothing she can legally do.

[misselle]

I may be wrong but i dont believe you are doing anything wrong as he is no paying any rent or bills he is merley a guest staying over a few nights. I wouldnt worry about the legal side but if you are then perhaps talk to shelter or CAB about it they should be able to help to tell you if there is anything wrong with it.

[advice]

Now Angry Leaseholders Kick Back At MANAGING AGENTS

 

Owners of leasehold flats are paying up to double the market rate for buildings insurance because

MANAGING AGENTS ARE INFLATING PREMIUMS.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

PRLog (Press Release) – Mar 02, 2009 – Now angry leaseholders kick back at the brokers

 

Flat owners could be paying up to double the best rates for buildings cover, thanks to hidden commission being shared out between brokers and managing agents, reports Jamie Elliott

 

* Jamie Elliott

* The Observer, Sunday 1 March 2009

* Article history

 

Owners of leasehold flats are paying up to double the market rate for buildings insurance because the property agents who manage their homes. Are inflating premiums

 

In a bid to secure business, some managing are choosing the insurer that pays the most commission, instead of the company that offers the best value –

Insurers who pay the most commission are often also those who charge the highest premiums. Although leaseholders bear the extra cost, they rarely find out about the inducements because there may not be an invoice and the inducements do not appear on their service charge statement or other documents.

 

Insurance broker Neil Cook, of TL Dallas, told Cash he is being approached by increasing numbers of leaseholders who are being charged significantly above the going rate.

 

"I see a lot of inflated premiums for blocks of flats where it just doesn't add up, and there is no way the broker has sought the best deal," he says. "Sometimes it is as much as double but, typically, the premium is about 30% above what you would expect to pay."

 

One leaseholder, who does not want to be named, learned he was paying over the odds only after he and other residents took over the management of their south London flats in October last year.

 

"When we got hold of the paperwork we saw that the company that managed the block was paying £6,632 a year for buildings insurance," he says. "Without too much difficulty, we managed to get the premium down to £3,731."

 

"

 

Managing agents that arrange insurance are regulated by the Financial Services Authority. Its rules say a firm must, if asked by a customer, disclose any commission it receives and "pay due regard to the interests of its customers and treat them fairly". But, because leaseholders are not the policyholders (that is usually the freeholder), the FSA does not consider them to be "customers" of either brokers or managing agents, so they are not protected. "Mostly, leaseholders would be considered third parties to the contract and our rules are of limited assistance to them," said an FSA spokesperson.

 

An alternative option for leaseholders who think they are being overcharged is to take their case to the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal (LVT), which adjudicates on whether service charges, including insurance costs, are "reasonably incurred". Last year, the LVT received 2,141 applications concerning insurance charges and other leasehold management issues, up 20% on 2007.

 

However, flat-owner Bilal Farid warns that simply getting access to insurance paperwork can be difficult. He wanted to see details of costs after discovering that he, and other leaseholders, were being charged far above the market rate to insure their block of 10 flats.

 

"The managing agent kept refusing to send me a copy of the insurance schedule, so eventually I went round to their offices," he says. "They got agitated and first of all refused to show it to me and then said it was in a different office."

 

Farid has still not seen the document, but in March last year, he and his neighbours took over the management and, with just a few phone calls, cut the annual premium from £2,700 to £1,875. Leasehold law specialist Nicola Stewart, of Rooks Rider solicitors, says leaseholders should persist when information is withheld. "Your annual service charge statement should specify the cost of insurance and if it does not, you have a legal right under the 1985 Landlord and Tenant Act to ask for this information."

Edited March 25, 2009 by maroondevo52
Removed links...........

[flyingdoc]

She has no recourse to do anything legally IMO.

 

Your having your BF to stay over perfectly acceptable, dont forget this is your home and it would be unreasonable (unless it were specifically noted in the terms of the lease ) to think that you would not have visitors or friends over.

[Beakermeep83]

Thank you for all your comments.

 

I have tried to go to CAB, but where I live they only have drop in centres and I work full time so can't just hang around.

 

It gets even better now we have a lounge and a dining room (currently only using this for storage). I have asked her to move her things out so I can use it as a lounge, she is refusing. Can you guess what I'll be doing at the weekend?!

 

One things for sure I'll never be house sharing again!!

 

Constant reassurance is always good, so please feel free to keep posting people

[hbc50l]

You may be on sticky ground.

 

Assuming that you have signed an standard tenancy agreement (you should have)

 

Clause 3.5 of an AST states that "Not to assign, sublet or part with posession of the Property, or let any other person live at the Property"

 

If you can demonstrate that a) he maintains another home and uses that say after work before coming round to yours b) doesnt keep clothes etc at your house then I would argue that he doesnt "live" there.

 

It seems that its a straightforward breakdown in relationship which can happen alot in shared houses.

 

Unfortunately, you have both entered into a legally binding agreement and need to see it through until its conclusion. Its best therefore to try and sit down, maybe somewhere neutral and thrash things out.

[Planner]

You may be on sticky ground.

 

Assuming that you have signed an standard tenancy agreement (you should have)

 

Clause 3.5 of an AST states that "Not to assign, sublet or part with posession of the Property, or let any other person live at the Property"

 

If you can demonstrate that a) he maintains another home and uses that say after work before coming round to yours b) doesnt keep clothes etc at your house then I would argue that he doesnt "live" there.

 

It seems that its a straightforward breakdown in relationship which can happen alot in shared houses.

 

Unfortunately, you have both entered into a legally binding agreement and need to see it through until its conclusion. Its best therefore to try and sit down, maybe somewhere neutral and thrash things out.

 

I must admit, I am confused. How on earth would you know what clause 3.5 of her tenancy agreement says? assuming there is even a clause 3.5 on it!!

 

Assuming there is a clause along similar lines, it wouldnt be relevant in this situation as boyfriends sleeping over dont really fall under this do they?

[hbc50l]

Because tenancy agreements fall into a limited number of catagories by far the most common being an Assured Shorthold Tenancy which must be issued in accordance with the provisions of the Housing Act ie un-amended.

 

You seem to want to pick a fight when I am offering advice?

 

If you read my response I offer the only potential relevant clause of the AST and then suggest that it doesnt apply unless certain other "tests" are applicable.

 

Lets try and help rather than bicker!

[Planner]

You seem to want to pick a fight when I am offering advice?

 

Not at all.

 

You have made a very specific statement that clause 3.5 of her tenancy agreement will be a clause relating to assigning or subletting? - again, why on earth do you think this? there are 1000s and 1000s and 1000s of differently worded ASTs out there, just because your particular version contains this clause at this paragraph doesnt mean that the other 99.9% of ASTs other tenants have will. The relevant housing act doesnt contain a blank template that all landlords most use. AST agreements can be a single page long or 20 pages. They can even be verbal/oral with no written clauses or agreements at all.

 

Clause 3.5 of the o/p tenancy agreement may relate to rent payments, garden mainatance, break clause, agency visits or where to serve notice.

Edited April 1, 2009 by Planner

[hbc50l]

You MAY be correct however, there are many provisions that MUST be included within an AST in a prescribed format and as such the vast majority of AST's will be in a prescribed format as published by a legal stationer or similar so as to ensure compliance with the law.

 

This actually opens up an interesting scenario because if the AST is non-standard then it may not comply with The Housing Act and possibly then be un-enforceable allowing the tenants to go their seperate ways.

 

Would it be possible to post a copy of the AST up here with any personal info removed?

 

Sorry if I caused any offence earlier, not intended!!

 

Want to help you out and enjoy a healthy debate on matters

[flyingdoc]

Sorry HBC I partially disagree with you.

 

In an AST both the tenant and the landlord have specific rights and obligations which are enforceable - but I am not aware of any particular requirement in the legislation that says that the contract even HAS to be written, let alone what format it must take.

 

Granted there are guidelines but they are guidelines and nothing more.

 

Now if there IS a tenancy agreement, and IF it breaches the housing act in some of the things it says then it MAY be voidable or unenforceable but that is not something I would hold my breath about.

 

IMHO the OP has not sublet her room, nor had someone else living with her. A "reasonable man" given todays society would expect that a single women may at some time have friends or boyfriends over to stay and In the absence of any undue disturbance to the other occupants of the house she has done nothing to breach her lease.

 

I know we only have the OP point of view - and with the best will in the world and the greatest of respect to the OP these can be not entirely impartial, but it seems to me that the other occupant of the house is more likely to be in breach of an AST by interfering with the OP's "quiet enjoyment" of the property.

[hbc50l]

Flyingdoc,

 

I agree!

 

Somehow I have come across against the OP on this one?

 

My points about the AST are based on good practice etc. and i totally accept the comments regrarding the formation of the contract etc.

 

I also agree that in reality the co-tenant has probably breached the implied term of allowing quiet enjoyment.

 

My previous advice was based on a potential opportunity that if there is a written AST then, it could be possibly be argued as being un-enforecable and therefore giving a route to disolve the co-sharing arrangement.

 

I remain, that the best remedy is to sit down and openly discuss the issues and then try to formulate a mutually agreeable plan forward even if thats only until the end of the tenancy and then go their seperate ways.

[flyingdoc]

I remain, that the best remedy is to sit down and openly discuss the issues and then try to formulate a mutually agreeable plan forward even if thats only until the end of the tenancy and then go their seperate ways.

 

completely agree!!

 

Somehow I have come across against the OP on this one?

 

I wouldnt say you come across as agains the OP but with respect I think you were a little defensive to Planner when he questioned your clause 3.5

 

I dont read Planners post as a personal attack - just that his opinion differed from yours. I have read a large number of planners posts and he doesnt normally make personal attacks, but he does offer his opinion, even if it conflicts with previous posts (and I have to say I have found him to be very knowledgable)

 

In such a forum as this - there are bound to be disagreements and it is important that when they happen they are not seen as personal (unless they are direct verbal assaults which should be strongly discouraged) but as debate and learning for all concerned.

 

I personally have learned many things from other members like planner, sidewinded and eiche and hopefully will learn many things more.

 

Good luck and thanks for taking time to assist.

[Planner]

completely agree!!

 

 

 

I wouldnt say you come across as agains the OP but with respect I think you were a little defensive to Planner when he questioned your clause 3.5

 

I dont read Planners post as a personal attack - just that his opinion differed from yours. I have read a large number of planners posts and he doesnt normally make personal attacks, but he does offer his opinion, even if it conflicts with previous posts (and I have to say I have found him to be very knowledgable)

 

In such a forum as this - there are bound to be disagreements and it is important that when they happen they are not seen as personal (unless they are direct verbal assaults which should be strongly discouraged) but as debate and learning for all concerned.

 

I personally have learned many things from other members like planner, sidewinded and eiche and hopefully will learn many things more.

 

Good luck and thanks for taking time to assist.

 

Cheers for the support Flyingdoc, is all been sorted between me and bc50l last night.

[hbc50l]

Fair comment!

 

Sensitive head now put away for good!

[kateJ84]

i would say since u pay half the rent for just urself and she get to pay half the rent for her and her son which constitutes as two people if she is going to play this game then the rent must be split three ways and she must covers her sons part as he is living on the property.

 

If she cannot behave like a mature adult then do it via writing if she wont sit down and talk with you and if she is storing items in the dining room she is then taking up three rooms as residence which was is more than the agreed two with common areas, move her stuff into the other living room and possibly ask the landlord for a lock request for this room and for your bedroom.