Short term tennant leaves v early - what are my rights?? HELP!!

[papadak]

Hi,

 

This is 1st post so please be gentle with me ...

 

We rented out a room in our house to someone for 8 weeks. The company they worked for paid their rent in full. After 2 days, yes 2 days they disappreared without trace, leaving the key in our letterbox and leaving us wondering what had happened. 3 months later we receive a letter requesting 7 of the 8 weeks rent back. We have refused ... are we right in doing this and do we have any rights etc??

[blacksheep1979]

Did you have a contract?

 

If yes, who signed it?

 

If yes, were there any clauses regarding leaving earlier and what length was the contract term for?

 

How did the company pay and did you give a receipt?

[papadak]

Hi,

 

There was no contract. The tennant was attending a course with 30 others. Each person arranges their own living arrangements. All details were agreed by email and telephone correspondence. The length of stay (from and to) was of course pre-arranged.

 

The company paid by cheque and I provided a receipt.

[papadak]

Also there were no clauses re early leaving and the period of time was pre-agreed for 8 weeks. (i.e. a from & to date)

[electron99]

My own view is that you don't have to refund anything.No adequate notice was given, and you could argue that you had to keep the room available in case the tenant returned.The fact that he chose not to use it is not your problem.

[demon_x_slash]

Did you attempt to contact the company involved to see where your tenant had gone? Did the company attempt to contact you before now? How far into the agreement are you - how many weeks were left before the company contacted you?

 

In 'normal' tenancy situations, the tenant is liable for any rent due for the duration of the tenancy, no matter where they are or what they're doing. By not even notifying you that they were breaking the agreement, you were unable to recover any of your losses by re-renting the property/room, and so the money remains yours - if the company/tenant had contacted you, you may have been able to arrange something, either by their arranging for another tenant (their responsibility if they break the contract), or by compensating you if this was not possible.

 

That is, as I said, how it works with 'normal' tenancy agreements - lodgers (living with landlord) have even less rights than tenants (living in seperate property), so I am unsure as to how far this goes with regards to contract law...

[blacksheep1979]

Yup, tell them to take a running jump - they're just trying it on. If the tennant hasn't told you he's leaving then as deomonx says you have to keep the room for him. Its kind of like me moving out of my flat, not canceling the standing order and in a years time asking for the rent back - totally unreasonable.

[papadak]

Thank you to those that have responded so far, very very grateful for this!

 

A bit more history to this situation:

 

Twice a year my wife & i rent out our spare room to professional medical people .. Doctors/ top physios etc. These people come from all the UK & Europe to attend an advanced course in their chosen field at this 'school of excellence'. The centre provides the 'students' with a listing of accomodation of which we are on that list. Each time the courses come around we always receive a lot of calls/emails (we have been doing this for 5 years and each time have received commendation each and every time. We always make sure that all their needs are provided for + desk, lighting, tv & internet use) In this particular instance we accepted this person over 3 others and everything went smoothly. As i've already stated their company paid for their stay in full (from 25th Sept - 17th Nov). They arrived a day early on the 24th, i even picked them up from the train station (1 hour round trip) Every courtesy as usual was offered and then on the 26th Sept (Tues) they disappeared without trace, leaving the door key in our letterbox. However the hallway was marked with what looked like suitcase streaks. I have since found out that they completed the course, so therefore must have stayed somewhere (their home is overseas) My thinking is they are trying to re-coup their other accomodation costings!

 

I have received a written claim for 7 of the 8 weeks. Giving us 14 days to produce a Bankers Draft before action!

 

Thanks for reading this.

[blacksheep1979]

let them take you to court - but first point out that you received no notice of termination so didn't know if the person was going to return or not and so had no chance to try recover any potential rent. Also point out you turned down other prospective tennants for this one so are definately out of pocket if you return the money. Finally suggest that maybe they should seek the refund from the tennant as it is them that has caused all the problems.

[papadak]

let them take you to court - but first point out that you received no notice of termination so didn't know if the person was going to return or not and so had no chance to try recover any potential rent. Also point out you turned down other prospective tennants for this one so are definately out of pocket if you return the money. Finally suggest that maybe they should seek the refund from the tennant as it is them that has caused all the problems.

 

Hi Blacksheep1979,

 

Thank you for your message

 

The person wanting to sue us is actually the Tenant, not the Company (who paid their rent in full at the start, i.e. before the tenant's arrival). The company appear not to be in the loop here. My thinking is the tenant is trying to re-coup their own actual outlay for accomodation found elsewhere. As I understand it from the Medical School they did complete the course, therefore they must have lived somewhere. I'm actually thinking of counter-suing here?

[papadak]

The last time we heard from this person was on the 25th Sept, the night before they vanished. The next time of course was via a registered letter demanding monies before action!

[papadak]

The letter demanding monies was received on 22nd Jan 2007 ... nearly 4 months later!

[MrShed]

Be aware, this situation is not (IMHO) as cut and dry as posters above suggest. It is probable that the court would take the returned key as the return of possession of the room. No written notice of termination is required from a normal tenant, never mind a lodger(who has zero security of tenure). A lodger needs give no notice at all that he is moving out. This is compounded by the fact that you have no written contract, only a parol(oral) one. If the judge is satisfied that such a parol contract for 8 weeks existed, then you will be entitled to the financial loss to you for breaking that contract, but NOT for the entire amount of the rent.

 

My opinion: they probably are just trying it on, and I would personally wait until they sue you. But be prepared for the possibility that you may well lose in court.

 

*EDIT* just read that it was the company that paid, this should mean that he has no claim. However, do not count on it. It depends how it is looked upon by the courts, who is seen as the "tenant"(company or the tenant). However, it does put you in a stronger position.

[half ax I]

Looks to me that the only entity that could ask for repayment is that which made the payment, ie the company. The contract (in whatever form it took) was with the company. You offered the room for a period of time and they paid for it. A contract existed in that an offer was made and was accepted and a consideration (payment) made with a legal intention for OP to deliver a room for a stated period. The person who used the room is not actually party to the contract and has no rights to ask you to repay them something they haven't paid you for.

 

IANAL - Just my thoughts.

[blacksheep1979]

mrshed - the op seems to imply that they had an agreement via email for an 8 week let.

[demon_x_slash]

And they were on a list of people who had done this before, it seems to be a regular setup; and as blacksheep says, the intent to form a contract was obvious (emails), and their previous experience as 8 week let 'landlords' strengthens their case that a contract was also formed this time for this tenant.

 

Good point halfax - if the company paid you, papadak, there is no way any refund in any shape or form can go directly to the tenant in any case, as it's not the tenant's money.

[MrShed]

If the tenant can prove that they reimbursed the company for the rent, then yes the tenant could sue. If the email details were with the tenant rather than the company, then this would be even more the case. BS, I did not read the bit about the emails. Regardless, I stand by the point that the existence of such a contract does not entitle the poster to the full 8 weeks rent, merely the rent for the time he was resident and any extra (provable) financial loss due him leaving early.

 

Who made the arrangements via email OP? The tenant or the company?

[demon_x_slash]

That's why I asked whether the OP had tried to contact the company or the tenant after the keys were posted back - if s/he had made every attempt to do so, and was unable to get hold of them for whatever reason, s/he would be out of pocket because s/he would have been unable to re-rent the room/property until the situation was sorted out; OP, who was the demand letter from, when did you receive it (at what point in the tenancy) and what does it say?

 

 

Edit: Why am I posting at this ungodsly hour? :O I'm back off to bed!

[papadak]

It looks like the tenant (i.e. the one that walked out after 2 days will sue. Let's see what happens. However comments here have helped a lot and I will of course contect this! ... it's like going to a concert/sporting event, walking out 5 mins into the thing and then demanding your money. Lots of love to you all. Jules xx:)

[MrShed]

Let us know how it goes. I wish you luck, but STRONGLY urge you to take heed of the points I have made above - I would personally be extremely surprised were you to win the case in its entirety. I think you need to carefully prepare yourself for the lodgers arguments, and also for the prospect that you may in fact lose.

 

I feel your strongest argument BTW is the fact that the company paid - ensure you keep proof of this!!

[papadak]

You feel that is a strong point?, so do i ... the company haven't made demand for any monies. This event took place over 4 months ago & now they choose to sue. The fact is that this tenant actually went to another accomodation and had to fork out for the remainder (virtually all of the rest of their time on this course) from their own pocket.

 

Your comments make me think about the possible downsides, that is always a possibility of course

[MrShed]

Well at the end of the day papadak, my advice would be useless if all I told people were the positives - hence why I state it from a legal rather than moral standpoint. I think it is only right that you are aware that this case is not set in stone, and there are possibilities of losing. I do not mean to bring you on a downer, but merely have you prepared for the case

[Nightmare4banks]

papadak,in reply to your post and in my view:

 

1.If the company paid for the lodgings and the lodger demands a refund,you MUST NOT refund the money to the lodger as this money was never the lodger's money in the first place.In this case,tell the lodger to "get lost" as in this case the lodger would not have half a leg to stand on in court.The only exception would be in the event of the lodger being a major shareholder of the company and would have to prove that i.e. details registered with Companies House which is probably very unlikely.

 

2.If the lodger gives back the keys,then this is "an implied surrender" of the lodgings.

 

3.Had the lodger given you the money rather than the company you should have refunded some of this money(6 weeks lodgings - 1 week for staying in your property and the second week to cover your readvertising and other costs associated with getting a new lodger) as once the keys were returned there should have been no reason whatsoever to not rent the room to another lodger.

 

4.You cannot blame the lodger that has given back the keys for not obtaining a new lodger should this be the case.

 

5.Finally,for security reasons you should have changed the locks if you had not already done so.

 

 

Anyway,I hope you find this information useful.

[papadak]

papadak,in reply to your post and in my view:

 

1.If the company paid for the lodgings and the lodger demands a refund,you MUST NOT refund the money to the lodger as this money was never the lodger's money in the first place.In this case,tell the lodger to "get lost" as in this case the lodger would not have half a leg to stand on in court.The only exception would be in the event of the lodger being a major shareholder of the company and would have to prove that i.e. details registered with Companies House which is probably very unlikely.

 

2.If the lodger gives back the keys,then this is "an implied surrender" of the lodgings.

 

3.Had the lodger given you the money rather than the company you should have refunded some of this money(6 weeks lodgings - 1 week for staying in your property and the second week to cover your readvertising and other costs associated with getting a new lodger) as once the keys were returned there should have been no reason whatsoever to not rent the room to another lodger.

 

4.You cannot blame the lodger that has given back the keys for not obtaining a new lodger should this be the case.

 

5.Finally,for security reasons you should have changed the locks if you had not already done so.

 

 

Anyway,I hope you find this information useful.

 

Hi Nightmare4banks, Firstly thank you for you contribution. Your 4th point I sorta don't understand? (perhaps you could re-phrase please. As mentioned before we rent out a double room in our house 2 times a year for 8 weeks periods at a time - i.e. the length of time the courses last. I contacted the medical school this morning to enquire as to why we hadn't heard from anyone Re. the latest course which started last week. Normally we would have emails/calls by now. Perhaps the centre has decided to take us off their list, I don't really know? ... I should maybe pursue this further. We have NEVER had a problem in the 7 previous times that we have 'rented' out our room in the past. In fact each of the previous incumbents have always wrote to us and the centre to thank us for our professionalism etc ... I wonder whether its my right or not to know whether the Centre has excluded us from their accomdation listing going forward - which if is the case is most unfair - maybe there is re-dress there I don't know. We just wish the lodger who 'walked out' after 2 days would stop trying to be a chancer by what we believe are trying to re-coup monies back to compensate for their own financial outlay for lodgings elsewhere. Anyhow I have enough here to make us believe that we should be fine should they pursue via the courts.

[blacksheep1979]

N4B I was under the impression that this would be similar in case to someone who signed an ast then moved out early - if someone cannot be found to fill the place (which is unlikely after the start of an 8 week course) then the original tennant is liable for their full rent for the full agreed period.

 

As everyone else has said, if the contract is with the company and it is the individual who is claiming the money back I'd be interested to see how they are going to word the claim. The only way I could see it even vaguely happening would be thorugh threatening behaviour or extreme religious(if these had been mentioned before requesting the property) differences etc.