Tenant wants to change the rent "due date", after being late with previous month...

djimi

beauf wrote: »

If they are not in arrears what is the 200 for?

How can you be in arrears if the due date for the rent hasn't passed? If the landlord agrees to the rent being paid on (for arguments sake) the 25th of the month going forward, then they don't turn around on the 12th (the day after the old rent due date) and claim arrears.

djimi

beauf wrote: »

If you make an agreement with someone put it in writing. otherwise they can just deny it happened. That they received no notice at all.

I did say in fairness if the tenant can prove that there was an agreement to change terms. If it was agreed over a phonecall then theres little chance of that happening. However, if it was agreed via email then the tenant has a very good case.

beauf

The due date for the next month hasn't passed but the due date for the current month has passed. If the tenant leaves on the next due date the LL will be 2wks out of pocket. Yes the LL agreed to 6wks. But thats a mistake IMO.

The tenant should have paid 2 wks now then 4wks on the next due date. Not 6wks on the next due date.

It doesn't make sense to wait for 6wks rent when the tenant can't pay 4wks.

beauf

djimi wrote: »

I did say in fairness if the tenant can prove that there was an agreement to change terms. If it was agreed over a phonecall then theres little chance of that happening. However, if it was agreed via email then the tenant has a very good case.

Case for what?

If the tenant pays 400 next month, who is to say its not 200 off arrears clearing the notice and 200 off rent? Thus a new notice will be issued.

If they don't pay anything and theres a notice of termination, does it really matter when the notice was. Its not like the LL can get them out, or recover any money if they are determined to overstay and see out the notice and beyond.

beauf

If the tenant had said they were going to be late, and made some contribution, and stayed in contact. I'd probably take a slightly different view.

djimi

beauf wrote: »

The due date for the next month hasn't passed but the due date for the current month has passed.

My reading of the situation is that the tenant has requested that the rent date has been moved permanently to later in the month. The OP has agreed to this, meaning that they old due date is now irrelevant. The due date has been moved to a date later in the month and the tenant is no longer in arrears.

This is my understanding anyway.

beauf wrote: »

If the tenant leaves on the next due date the LL will be 2wks out of pocket. Yes the LL agreed to 6wks. But thats a mistake IMO.

The tenant should have paid 2 wks now then 4wks on the next due date. Not 6wks on the next due date.

It doesn't make sense to wait for 6wks rent when the tenant can't pay 4wks.

It might not make sense, but that is what has been agreed.

Again, I am basing this on the tenant having some sort of proof of the agreement.

djimi

beauf wrote: »

Case for what?

If the tenant pays 400 next month, who is to say its not 200 off arrears clearing the notice and 200 off rent? Thus a new notice will be issued.

A case for the notice of arrears that has been issued being invalid.

My understanding of the situation is that the tenant asked to pay the rent at the end of the month rather than the middle, and has agreed to pay an extra half a months rent this month to balance it out. The OP has agreed. Therefore, the tenant is not in arrears until the new due date has passed and the month and a halfs rent has not been paid. As it stands, there are no arrears; just the current months rent, which was agreed would be paid at the end of the month rather than in the middle of the month, and the extra couple of weeks to balance it out.

mitosis

sbsquarepants wrote: »

No he's not. Sounds like a simple cash flow/budgeting issue to me.
I've had to change several loan repayments etc over the years to suit when I got paid. I wasn't great at putting money by for this and for that so the easiest solution for me was get paid, pay all bills straight away and what's left is mine to do with as I see fit. It's still the way I do things.
Once you get a months rent every month, what does it matter what day you get it on?

In fairness, if he is paying a mortgage on the property, for example, it may matter greatly what day of the month he gets paid. The tenant's cash flow problem doesn't justify affecting his obligation to his LL. If he wants to live in the adult world where people are responsible for their own wellbeing..................

beauf

djimi wrote: »

A case for the notice of arrears that has been issued being invalid.

My understanding of the situation is that the tenant asked to pay the rent at the end of the month rather than the middle, and has agreed to pay an extra half a months rent this month to balance it out. The OP has agreed. Therefore, the tenant is not in arrears until the new due date has passed and the month and a halfs rent has not been paid. As it stands, there are no arrears; just the current months rent, which was agreed would be paid at the end of the month rather than in the middle of the month, and the extra couple of weeks to balance it out.

You're taking the word arrears to mean paid after new date. Whereas as my understanding is any payment paid afterwards is always arrears. Be it payment in arrears, or wages in arrears is still arrears. The months rent is being paid in advance. The 2wks adjustment is being paid in arrears.

Even the PRTB recommend this is done in writing.

STEP ONE:
Notice of breach of obligation the landlord must notify the tenant that:
the tenant is in arrears of rent;
the tenant is allowed a reasonable time to remedy that breach of obligation;
the landlord is entitled to terminate the tenancy if the tenant fails to remedy that breach of obligation within the period specified.
This first notification does not need to be in writing. A landlord can give a tenant verbal notice of the rent arrears but must ensure that the tenant is aware that failure to pay the rent arrears within a reasonable time will result in the landlord terminating the tenancy.As a landlord may need to give evidence that this has been communicated to the tenant, it may be prudent to give this notice in writing.

My emphasis.

djimi

beauf wrote: »

You're taking the word arrears to mean paid after new date. Whereas as my understanding is any payment paid afterwards is always arrears. Be it payment in arrears, or wages in arrears is still arrears. The months rent is being paid in advance. The 2wks adjustment is being paid in arrears.

Im taking arrears to be rent that is still owed past the date on which it was supposed to be paid. If rent is collected on the 20th then any outstanding rent owed on the 21st is arrears. Thats what the 14 day notice of arrears covers, and that is what I am now questioning. The date on which the rent is to be collected has been moved by mutual consent, so this months rent is no longer in arrears as the newly agreed rent date has not passed.

Even the PRTB recommend this is done in writing.

I agree; both parties should have gotten the agreement in writing (the tenant moreso as it is in their interest).

beauf

I would treat the rent paid in arrears and rent paid in advance separately. Otherwise the tenant could keep doing part payments of the entire sum rather than clearing arrears. That could go on indefinitely. IMO its a bad idea to start mixing prepaid rent and post paid (arrears) as the same thing.

If the tenant has nothing in writing, it simply delays the any action the LL might take. Which is the point the PRTB is making.

djimi

beauf wrote: »

I would treat the rent paid in arrears and rent paid in advance separately. Otherwise the tenant could keep doing part payments of the entire sum rather than clearing arrears. That could go on indefinitely. IMO its a bad idea to start mixing prepaid rent and post paid (arrears) as the same thing.

If the tenant has nothing in writing, it simply delays the any action the LL might take. Which is the point the PRTB is making.

"Arrears" in this context has nothing to do with how the rent is paid. It simply means rent that should have been paid and is currently outstanding. Im Im due to pay this months rent on the 20th and come the 21st I havent paid then this months rent is in arrears.

sunnysoutheast

Surely this is all arguing about angels dancing on the head of a pin anyway. Unless the tenant has made arrangements to share the rent with someone else, as per the original lease, I don't see how he is suddenly going to be able to pay it, arrears or no, given that there has already been an issue.

This sounds an awful lot like the tenant is simply kicking the can down the road to me.

beauf

I agree. It will only dig a deeper hole.

Grumpypants

There is a lot missing from the thread.

Was the house let to both parties? When the first guy wanted to move out did he give proper notice? What did the landlord do to address this? Is the remaining tenant blocked from subletting the other room? Why did the landlord not get another tenant?

If the remaining tenant agreed to rent the whole house surely you signed a new agreement.

From the tenants point of view he has paid on time and looked after the house for 7 months, and now the first month his rent has been doubled all he wants to do is to move his payment date closer to his pay day. It seems like a very reasonable request. Something that should have been addressed by the landlord at the time, instead of moving the due date back it could have been moved forward to line up with his payday.

It is sloppy from the Op who has played his part in creating the situation

housetypeb

Grumpypants wrote: »

There is a lot missing from the thread.

Was the house let to both parties?...... Why did the landlord not get another tenant? .......

If the remaining tenant agreed to rent the whole house surely you signed a new agreement.

Presumably this is where joint and several liability comes into the picture, the tenant is responsible for the full rent-assuming they both signed the lease- if his fellow tenant moved out.
It's not up to the landlord to find another tenant, as far as he's concerned the house is let and the rent is due.
Why would he need a new lease?

Zulu

The only thing missing from this thread is a lock! It's all done and dusted at this point...

...well at least until the end of the month! And fingers crossed I won't be posting bad news then.

The_Conductor

Done.