PDA

View Full Version : Question re tenant sub-letting



markwmoss
04-02-2009, 21:31 PM
My tenants are coming to the end of their contract. They've been great over the past year, no hassle whatsoever, looked after the place well. We've been talking about renewing the tenancy: One of them wants to stay, while the other wants to move out.

The one that wants to stay says he can afford to meet the full rent (as opposed to his half share up to now), but has asked if he can find another flat-mate to share with in his own time (rather than me finding another person to move in with him), after signing another tenancy agreement with me i.e. effectively sub-let to someone else, via a formal aor informal arrangement. So, only the existing tenant would be signing an agreement with me.

Does anyone have any advice as to whether this is this a good or bad idea from my perspective? Might I be opening myself up to some risk with the new tenant (who wouldn't be on the tenancy agreement), who I might even know anything about.

On the one hand, he's offering to continue paying the same level of rent as before, but on the other I feel a bit uneasy at losing control over who's living in my property.

Cheers,
Mark

Mrs Jones
04-02-2009, 21:36 PM
Why not let it roll over to a periodic tenancy until he finds another flat mate, then commence a new AST with both after referencing the new tenant etc. If he finds he can't pay the rent, you will only have to give 2 months notice for possession and won't be stuck with a tenant in your house with whom you have no contract.

mind the gap
04-02-2009, 21:38 PM
Good advice...and if you're concerned about his ability to afford the rent, ask him if can find a guarantor?

jta
04-02-2009, 22:06 PM
But if he takes the tenancy alone, any person he gets in will be his lodger, no security of tenure anyway.

mind the gap
04-02-2009, 22:20 PM
But if he takes the tenancy alone, any person he gets in will be his lodger, no security of tenure anyway.

It would be more secure from the LL's point of view if both Ts were named as such on a new AST, since he has more chance of getting the rent out of two of them than out of just one (if the resident LL tenant kicked out his lodger, for instance).

?no?

Preston
05-02-2009, 00:35 AM
But if he takes the tenancy alone, any person he gets in will be his lodger, no security of tenure anyway.

Not necessarily, the new occupier could be a tenant, although not an AST with a resident landlord. It wouldn't be hard for the tenant to do something silly (from Mark's point of view) like granting a fixed term contractual tenancy, perhaps even advertently by picking up a standard form of contract from a stationers or whatever. So, I very much agree with the advice given earlier. Avoid a subletting situation if at all possible.

Ericthelobster
05-02-2009, 08:02 AM
The one that wants to stay says he can afford to meet the full rent (as opposed to his half share up to now), but has asked if he can find another flat-mate to share with in his own time (rather than me finding another person to move in with him), after signing another tenancy agreement with me i.e. effectively sub-let to someone else, via a formal aor informal arrangement. So, only the existing tenant would be signing an agreement with me. Why would you want to do this, rather than creating a new tenancy with your existing tenant and the newbie named as co-tenants? I'd go with Mrs Jones' advice.

There might be a problem if AN Other fails your vetting procedure, but if that happens would you really want that person anyway (eg what happens if tenant 1 quits and leaves him behind)?

markwmoss
05-02-2009, 08:58 AM
Why not let it roll over to a periodic tenancy until he finds another flat mate, then commence a new AST with both after referencing the new tenant etc. If he finds he can't pay the rent, you will only have to give 2 months notice for possession and won't be stuck with a tenant in your house with whom you have no contract.
With regards to a periodic tenancy, do I actually need to sign anything new with the current tenant?

Or is the case that once ASTs expire, the tenancy automatically reverts to a periodic one without anything being signed? Sounds like this is the case?

Ericthelobster
05-02-2009, 10:25 AM
With regards to a periodic tenancy, do I actually need to sign anything new with the current tenant?

Or is the case that once ASTs expire, the tenancy automatically reverts to a periodic one without anything being signed? Sounds like this is the case?Exactly that, yes, which is why Mrs J's advice makes perfect sense I'd have thought. No need for any signatures.

jeffrey
05-02-2009, 11:38 AM
Exactly that, yes, which is why Mrs J's advice makes perfect sense I'd have thought. No need for any signatures.
I agree. See s.5 of Housing Act 1988 re continuation tenancy's provisions and effect.