Landlord wont let wife live with me....please help!

[lordfsa]

Hello all,

 

I am seeking some advice regarding some problems I am having with my landlord. I hope you can shed some light on the legality of all this.

 

My wife and I have been renting this 2 bedroom flat since July 2008 on a 6 monthly Assured Shorthold Tenancy in both our names. Every six months, we extend and renew the contract. The landlord used one of those standard tenancy agreements sold by WH Smith...so the small print is generic with no hidden clauses.

 

However, in November 2009 my wife and I started having some serious issues and were about to divorce. She moved out over Christmas. In January 2010, when it came to renew the contract, I was finding the rent difficult to cover on my own, so the landlord agreed to reduce the immediate rent by about 20% which I am to pay him back next year when I move closer to my university (I will be getting loans and grants and will have to work my posterior off over the summer holidays). I signed the normal AST, in my name only, reflecting the new rent and signed a separate statement agreeing to the arrangement of paying the landlord the deficit later.

 

However, over the last two months my wife and I attended some couples counselling and we have made a surprising amount of progress. Given this, I want her to move back in with me so we can give things another go. I am expecting to stay here till September 2010, when we will move closer to my new university. Herein lies the problem: the landlord does not agree.

 

I would like to know where I legally stand in this matter....can the landlord actually refuse my wife to live with me when there will be no statutory overcrowding as a result? I have asked him politely and he says that the flat is for me only and if I want to stay till September 2010, my wife cannot join me. He said I am welcome to leave in July 2010 when the 6-monthly period is up.

 

According to www dot housingadviceni dot org/rights-when-renting/sharing-and-subletting/lodgers-a-sub-tenants-rights dot html, it says: "You usually have the right to live in your home along with anyone else who is part of your household. This means that you can live with: your husband or wife, your partner, your children, anyone else who normally lives with you. You can usually live with members of your household even if they are not mentioned on the tenancy agreement".

 

Does that work in my favour?

 

 

On another note, I never received any documents regarding my deposit being held in a TDS, which I now understand is mandatory. I am in the midst of contacting the three services to see if any of them are holding it. If they are not, is it worth me filing a claim while I am still a tenant?

 

Thanks in advance for any advice or suggestions!

[bobinky]

Hello all,

 

So he agreed to reduce the rent as you were going to be living alone and would struggle to pay,that was quite nice of him as he could have chucked you out if you didnt pay.But now the missis is coming back and you dont want to pay the extra even though you could?

If she comes back then you could pay as before,Im sure if you agree to pay full rent again hed be happy for your missis to move back in,have you asked?

[lordfsa]

No no, I offered to pay the full rent as before!

 

I should've made that clearer. I'm not trying to con him out of anything....I appreciate how generous he was instead of evicting me when I was going to struggle on my own. I asked quite clearly that if he were to agree to let her back in, I would naturally pay the full amount as originally agreed......but he still refused.

[Aequitas]

But your rent has not actually been reduced, it has just been agreed that payment will be spread over a longer period.

 

Reduced or not, I can see no way that a landlord can prevent a a tenant's wife living with him. One even has to doubt whether a "no wives" clause would be enforceable.

[bobinky]

Then unless hes rented it for sole occupation in the contract he cant stop anyone living there with you.

Id still try the reasonable route first and have a talk to see what his objections are to her coming back,were arguments upsetting the neighbours before you split ect.

In the end if she moves in he has to evct you both and he cant do that without good reason.

As in all these cases its better to try and be reasoable but if they wont play ball then put everything in writing and send everything recorded and stick to your rights.

[lordfsa]

But your rent has not actually been reduced, it has just been agreed that payment will be spread over a longer period.

 

 

The landlord won't be out of pocket, whether or not he lets my wife stay with me. If he agrees, it just means he gets the full payment up front instead of it being spread.

 

But on another note, the AST renewal I signed in January says the rent is £700 instead of the usual £900.......in retrospect, the landlord should've written £900 and not made me sign the additional affidavit.

[lordfsa]

Then unless hes rented it for sole occupation in the contract he cant stop anyone living there with you.

 

There is nothing in the AST that specifies it is for me only. He used one of the standard WH Smith packages....so the Ts & Cs are standard.

 

 

 

Id still try the reasonable route first and have a talk to see what his objections are to her coming back,were arguments upsetting the neighbours before you split ect.

In the end if she moves in he has to evct you both and he cant do that without good reason.

As in all these cases its better to try and be reasoable but if they wont play ball then put everything in writing and send everything recorded and stick to your rights.

 

I've tried the reasonable route through texts and phonecalls....which in hindsight will not stand up in court, so I should switch to communicating with him in writing.

 

We have not been in breach of any of the standard AST terms.....rent is paid on time, no arrears in bills, no problems with neighbours, no overcrowding, no 'illegal activities' being carried out on the premises, no criminal convictions, no CCJs..........

 

If it turns out that he has not put our deposit in one of the schemes, does that mean he cannot give us notice to evict? That would work in our favour to stretch things out till September....

 

 

Many thanks for all your help.

[bobinky]

Then he cant stop whoever you want living with you.Move her back in and let him do what he wants,even if he went to court and somehow won it'd still take till later than Sept.

You dont have to tell him shes living there,your not sub letting in any way.

if your not needing references from him then sadly even if the relationship turns sour it doesnt matter.

Personally Id just ignore him and get on with life.If he thinks he has grounds for her not living there then he has to state them to get you evicted otherwise he cant do anything except talk.

get on with life and dont worry about it.

If he comes up with a reason for his actions based on law then pop back on here otherwise he may as well talk to a brick wall.

And do remember,if anything in life relating to laws and regs starts happening make it always in writing right from the start.

[lordfsa]

Then he cant stop whoever you want living with you.

Thank you....thats such a relief to hear!

 

 

And do remember,if anything in life relating to laws and regs starts happening make it always in writing right from the start.

After all this, I am definitely going to remember that lesson....thank you!

 

 

 

Do you think I should pursue the non-TDS compliance? I don't think he will be that forthcoming with the deposit if things turn sour...... Or should I wait till we leave, see how much he offers and then use an N1 form?

[Kentish Lass]

It is probably not worth doing anything now - there seems to be a position with the courts recently whereby if the LL protects the deposit late, the 3xpenalty is not enforced - which is totally wrong, but the legislation is so badly drafted it fails to give the tenant the protection it was supposed to.

 

Be prepared for LL not to give it back (i.e. try to save enough for a deposit on the next property without having to rely on getting this one back) and deal with it then. The important thing is whether a proper inventory (which you agreed to and signed) was carried out at the start of the tenancy. If not, LL cannot prove condition at the end of the tenancy was any different from the condition at the start.

 

You may have to sue for the return of your money so get as much info in the LL as you can (address etc. etc.)

 

And bobinky is so right - everything in writing - and keep it all - you just never know when you may need it.

[lordfsa]

It is probably not worth doing anything now - there seems to be a position with the courts recently whereby if the LL protects the deposit late, the 3xpenalty is not enforced - which is totally wrong, but the legislation is so badly drafted it fails to give the tenant the protection it was supposed to.

 

So if LLs can protect the deposit retrospectively, what is the point of the penalty? Which insane LL would NOT protect when served with court papers.....thus voiding the penalty all the time.

 

The important thing is whether a proper inventory (which you agreed to and signed) was carried out at the start of the tenancy. If not, LL cannot prove condition at the end of the tenancy was any different from the condition at the start.

 

The 'inventory' was just a handwritten list of the landlord's furniture in the flat. No references were made to their or the flat's condition. It wasn't exactly the most thorough and concise of inventories...but is that enough to give him grounds to prove the condition of the flat?

 

Naturally, I will make sure the flat is cleaned thoroughly and will take plenty of photographs and videos of the place to prove its condition. I haven't turned it into a tip......although everytime the LL has visited, they have always picked on something....like "you have too many things" or "the shower isn't clean enough". They want it in the uninhabited pristine state it was in when the flat was refurbished before we took up the tenancy; it seems to be setting the precedence for the pending deposit dispute!

 

 

You may have to sue for the return of your money so get as much info in the LL as you can (address etc. etc.)

 

I've got the LL's details from the Land Registry. Will keep a hold of it till the deposit is back in my hands.

[lordfsa]

As a follow up to the above, my AST is due to come to an end on the 17th of July and the LL has not served notice. In view of this, I decided to serve a Notice to Quit which should take me up to the 17th of September, when I can move out. As far as I am aware, the AST automatically changes to a periodic rolling contract, and the LL must give 2 months notice to require possession. Whoever issues the notice, we will be able to stay here till Sep.

I was hoping someone could go through the wording of my notice to see if I covered the essential points.

The 6-month fixed term of the Assured Shorthold Tenancy for the aforementioned property draws to an end on the 17th of July 2010. A notice to quit under Section 21(1)(b) of the Housing Act 1988 has not been served on your behalf. Therefore, this tenancy will hereby become a statutory periodic tenancy. This will be a monthly periodic tenancy commencing from the 18th of July, the day after the end of the fixed-term, according to statutory law.

Under Section 21(4)(b) of the Housing Act 1988 (amended 1996), the landlord is required to give at least two months’ Notice to Quit in writing, while the tenant is only required to give at least one month’s Notice to Quit.

I, the tenant, hereby serve a two month Notice to Quit. This notice is effective from the 18th of July 2010, when the monthly periodic tenancy commences. This will remain effective until the 17th of September 2010, when possession of the property will be returned to you.

 

On another note, how shall I proceed with the deposit issue? I have written confirmation from all three schemes to say my deposit is not protected with them. The AST we signed categorically states it needs to be protected under a government approved scheme.

When is it best to bring this up with the landlord?

Once again, thank you all very much!