Thank you, Peter2. It feels reassuring for my position to be supported as her initial attack made me question myself.
2 Likes
HI Mallina the ex tenant sounds a horrid aggressive sort and as others have said, what you do with the room after she returned the key and retrieved her deposit, is nothing to do with her. If there had been an ingress of rodents after she had left would she have dealt with this? No I sure she would not. I am fully on your side. She has just got a strop on as you had the good luck to be able to re-tenant the room before the end of the month.
2 Likes
Thank you Jennifer5, that’s really kind and I appreciate words of support.
1 Like
Malina, you seem to be ignoring my posts, and indeed any post that tells you something you don’t want to hear. As such, I’m happy to bow out of this thread.
David actually I tried responding, but my post has been waiting approval for a whole day for some reason. I tried amending it, but even this new version has been awaiting approval for 6 hours. This hasn’t been the case with my previous posts, no approval was needed beforehand so not sure what’s going on. I wasn’t beingvin any way disrespectful. So I haven’t ignored it, thank you for your input. I just disagree with illegally evicting anyone.
1 Like
Ok, I understand. I’m just not sure what you mean by
Yes sorry, this part really wasn’t clear. Basically you’re saying that re-renting means one is either automatically ending the tenancy with the new tenant moving in, or that one is illegally evicting a tenant. In principle I’d agree, but this case doesn’t fit such a black and white scenario. The lady overpayed on purpose as an act of compensation, without wanting to use the rent for actually living in the space. So she was trying to correct damage incurred for not upholding her word and abandoned the property by her own choice. The question is therefore whether this is rent as such, or an apology that she now regrets making. I certainly haven’t evicted her, she left by her own choice so not sure this could count as illegal eviction. If a judge would see this as a purely black and white scenario of “double rent” without any concern about the context I’d be surprised. That’s not to say I don’t value your input or that I don’t allow for the option of this perspective being adopted by the Court. I just find it reductionist.
I dont think it really matters what her motive was at the time as its clear that the sum she paid was rent for a whole month, as she is required to do by the contract and the law. The Tenant Fees Act is very strict about what can be charged by a landlord when a tenant asks to leave early and what the definition is of those things. You could have asked for your costs in relation to re-letting and to pay rent until the property was re-let or you could have demanded rent until the end of the contract. There isnt any room for other charges. Whilst you may have the moral high-ground, I believe that legally you have charged 2 people rent at the same time and if she chooses to sue you for the return of the relevant portion, I think she would win, since the law is clear and judges dont rule on what may be fair, they rule on the law.
You should also bear in mind that if she is appointed a court solicitor, they may choose to sue on the basis of the other more lucrative interpretation, which is that you have illegally evicted her by letting it to someone else whilst she was still paying rent.
3 Likes
Thank you for this caution, David. I acknowledge that it’s a polarising situation, where on the one hand very literal reading of the law will see this as “double rent”, but equally so there are views from citizens advice as well as from a legal advisor I contacted from my union to say I did nothing wrong here. I can see that this may be interpreted differently by the court as you suggest, but it’s not a straightforward situation. Had I not paid for the estate agent this wouldn’t have been a matter of dispute as the actual loss for me is £250. It could have been much bigger loss had I not luckily found someone to move in. It’s very easy to now in hindsight say that I should have specified her long term stay in the contract or in the written agreement with the estate agent, but he is a reputable estate agent in a small community and she has a senior position as a prifessional, so I didn’t have any reason not to believe her words. If I was the estate agent I would have stepped in at this point and offered the reimbursement of the fee as the agreement clearly wasn’t upheld and I would have felt at least partly responsible to settle the matter if the ex tenant had failed to do so.
Obviously I would have asked for a reimbursememt of tenant finder fee had she not left the extra rent, which I assumed served as a reimbursement. At least that’s how she presented it until she found out a new lodger moved in.
2 Likes
I don’t think you’ve done anything wrong either, and I wouldn’t recommend asking for a long tenancy. Most landlords I know, (including me) opt for a 6 month fixed term and then let it go periodic. That way either the tenant or the landlord is in a position to end the tenancy if circumstances change. I think its just that the Tenant Fees Act has placed very tight restrictions on what a landlord can do when a tenant asks to end a tenancy early and landlords often lose out by this. You’re certainly not the only one.
In your shoes I would probably wait and see what the tenant does next. If they allow you to keep the over-payment then fine, (although you would want some written evidence of this). If they continue to demand a refund, then I’d think very seriously about the risk and perhaps get some specialist advice from a housing lawyer.
1 Like
My apologies, but I lost track of the fact that you mentioned these were lodgers, not AST tenants. If by that you mean that they are living in the same property as you and sharing some living accommodation, then unless you’ve given them additional rights contractually, they will be licensees with very few rights. The Tenant Fees Act still applies, but it would be much less likely that she could sue you for illegal eviction.
2 Likes
As I’ve stated multiple times on this thread, you have suffered absolutely NO financial loss at all. You paid £250 for an agent to find a lodger. They did that. Despite you disagreeing with this, your actions belie your statements as your complaint is against the lodger, not the agent.
Contrary to your claims about financial loss, the whole basis for David’s legal caution is that you have in fact made a financial profit from this situation.
1 Like
Thank you for considering this matter in detail, I really appreciate it. Yes, I live in the property with 2 lodgers, I am the only tenant with a contract that accounts for 2 lodgers.
I enquired about solicitor fees, which for a consulting hour almost equal the sum disputed here.
I tried to read the legislation a bit myself abd came across this thread, but not sure if the same legislation still applies:
Any thoughts?
Thank you for the link to that thread on Propertytribes. Having read David Smith’s post, I accept that I am wrong about the need to repay the funds. Even though the post is from early 2015, then unless you also served a s21 notice, I dont believe that there is anything in the more recent legislation, (notably the Deregulation Act and the Tenant Fees Act) that would change this. David is a leading housing lawyer and I would have full confidence in his advice. On the basis of what youve said, I think you are safe to keep the full months rent from the first tenant. My apologies for taking you down this dead end and any worry caused.
I note that in your last post you mention that you are a tenant of the property. As you may be aware, the HMO exemption for having 2 lodgers only applies to owner-occupiers, so your property was an HMO for the period where they were both living with you. The full HMO Management Regulation would apply and if your local authority licences 3 person HMOs, then you would be in breach of licensing law without one. Your lodgers could claim a Rent Repayment Order against you to seek up to 12 months rent back.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.