Girl is leaving in two weeks need advice

Donnajoe

A girl I am renting a room to is leaving I.two weeks due to.her causing trouble. But I.want to advertise her room but people want to view and she.wont let anyone see it. What can I do

Michael D Not Higgins

Is this the same room in your own home that you mentioned in your other thread? If so, it's your house and your rules, she is a licensee with no right to exclude you from the room like a tenant would.

You could have her out today legally. I'd suggest to her that you're being fair with notice as long as she's fair with you getting the room filled again.

Donnajoe

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

Is this the same room in your own home that you mentioned in your other thread? If so, it's your house and your rules, she is a licensee with no right to exclude you from the room like a tenant would.

You could have her out today legally. I'd suggest to her that you're being fair with notice as long as she's fair with you getting the room filled again.

Its a different room. She refused to pay towards fuel to heat her rads and then wanted the fire lit everyevening for her and I said I couldnt over having work and she verbally abused me.

athtrasna

Donnajoe wrote: »

Its a different room. She refused to pay towards fuel to heat her rads and then wanted the fire lit everyevening for her and I said I couldnt over having work and she verbally abused me.

In that case I don't know why you're giving her two weeks notice. Abuse of any kind is not acceptable and she doesn't have a legal right to anything other than "reasonable notice"

Brego888

Have her stuff in black bags outside the door when she next leaves and change the locks.

Donnajoe

I gave her a lease so will I not be bound to.that

athtrasna

Donnajoe wrote: »

I gave her a lease so will I not be bound to.that

Never give licencees a lease. You are giving them rights they are not entitled to by law.

Donnajoe

athtrasna wrote: »

Never give licencees a lease. You are giving them rights they are not entitled to by law.

Noone will move in.with out one

athtrasna

Donnajoe wrote: »

Noone will move in.with out one

Far from the truth, and I speak from personal experience on both sides. Give them house rules but no lease.

Donnajoe

athtrasna wrote: »

Far from the truth, and I speak from personal experience on both sides. Give them house rules but no lease.

Any one that came to see our rooms refused to mive in without one. How do u explain ur not going to give one

Paulw

Donnajoe wrote: »

Any one that came to see our rooms refused to mive in without one. How do u explain ur not going to give one

You simply explain that they would be a licensee and not a tenant, so a lease is not legally required.

Boater123

Donnajoe wrote: »

Any one that came to see our rooms refused to mive in without one. How do u explain ur not going to give one

If they ask for a tenancy agreement explain to them that they're not tenants but licensee's ((lodgers). That you, the owner, live in the house so they cannot be tenants under the law.

You could offer them a licensee agreement which could contain particulars about security deposit, rent and when its due, visitors, smoking, bills, cleaning, notice they have to give you, that kind of thing.

I wouldn't be putting in it notice to the lodgers in case this happens again. Its your home, and if a lodger starts doing something like dealing and smoking heroin, would you want to give them a months notice or kick them out there and then?

4ensic15

Donnajoe wrote: »

Any one that came to see our rooms refused to mive in without one. How do u explain ur not going to give one

Give a right to reside agreement.

newacc2015

Donnajoe wrote: »

I gave her a lease so will I not be bound to.that

I wonder if the lease is in fact legally binding. For a contract to be valid, there has to be legality of purpose ie it has to be legal to enter into a contract. You have signed a lease, but your rental agreement is in fact a licensee agreement. You lease might have no legal weight. I am not a solicitor and this is not to be intended to be legal advice. I would call the RTB and see if they think it is legally binding.

Even if it did, I cant see how she enforce it. I doubt the RTB will not take it on.

You lease agreement might not actually be legally binding.

Mrs OBumble

Donnajoe wrote: »

Any one that came to see our rooms refused to mive in without one. How do u explain ur not going to give one

OP, it's clear that you are operating in a particular segment of the rental market.

To be honest, I can understand why people viewing your rooms want some kind of written agreement. I think you should give them some kind of agreement, like your departing tenant has. Even if it's not enforcable by the courts, it is good to get the ground rules down on paper.

Re your problem: I also think you should not try to let the room until the woman who is leaving has moved out: having a clearly unhappy person who is moving out there when someone else is viewing the room is not going to give a good vibe to the person viewing the room. And she should not have to have strangers going through her room when she's not there.

In future, put a contribution to the cost of oil into the rent instead of trying to charge it separately.

davindub

newacc2015 wrote: »

I wonder if the lease is in fact legally binding. For a contract to be valid, there has to be legality of purpose ie it has to be legal to enter into a contract. You have signed a lease, but your rental agreement is in fact a licensee agreement. You lease might have no legal weight. I am not a solicitor and this is not to be intended to be legal advice. I would call the RTB and see if they think it is legally binding.

Even if it did, I cant see how she enforce it. I doubt the RTB will not take it on.

You lease agreement might not actually be legally binding.

Its not covered under RTB legislation so pursue through small claims or district court. Most likely small claims.

I don't think you have the right of entry into her room, if she has paid for it, that would be her private area.

4ensic15

newacc2015 wrote: »

I wonder if the lease is in fact legally binding. For a contract to be valid, there has to be legality of purpose ie it has to be legal to enter into a contract. You have signed a lease, but your rental agreement is in fact a licensee agreement. You lease might have no legal weight. I am not a solicitor and this is not to be intended to be legal advice. I would call the RTB and see if they think it is legally binding.

Even if it did, I cant see how she enforce it. I doubt the RTB will not take it on.

You lease agreement might not actually be legally binding.

There is nothing illegal about doing it. It does not however, come under the RTA. The RTb will have nothing to do with it. The RTB do not examine written documents unless a dispute is opened. She could go to the courts for enforcement.
There is an outstanding problem caused by various PRTB decisions. If the bedroom is a dwelling it should have its own kitchen and bathroom contained within it under the Housing Standards regulations. It is possible that a court might take a different view but the O/P will not want to be the test case.

campingcarist

athtrasna wrote: »

Far from the truth, and I speak from personal experience on both sides. Give them house rules but no lease.

Or a Licensee Agreement, should you wish to have a written agreement.

The_Conductor

4ensic15 wrote: »

Give a right to reside agreement.

They do not have a 'right to reside' they are residing under licence, without rights- as the owner is resident in the property.
Giving them a document stating they have a 'right to reside' is giving them all manner of rights that they have no expectation of in law.

4ensic15

The_Conductor wrote: »

They do not have a 'right to reside' they are residing under licence, without rights- as the owner is resident in the property.
Giving them a document stating they have a 'right to reside' is giving them all manner of rights that they have no expectation of in law.

Residing under licence is a right to reside. A person has the rights conferred on them by their contract. A party to a contract cannot have no rights. It doesn't matter what any agreement is called, it is a question of examining the substance. Some documents described as leases have been held to be licences and more often the opposite has been the case. The law implies significant conditions into some residential leases but does not imply as many conditions into other agreements.

The_Conductor

4ensic15 wrote: »

Residing under licence is a right to reside. A person has the rights conferred on them by their contract. A party to a contract cannot have no rights. It doesn't matter what any agreement is called, it is a question of examining the substance. Some documents described as leases have been held to be licences and more often the opposite has been the case. The law implies significant conditions into some residential leases but does not imply as many conditions into other agreements.

The OP is an owner occupier- and is not under any obligation to confer any rights to a prospective housemate- they have no rights under the amended Residential Tenancies Act- and can be asked to vacate a property with no notice- or reason. Please reread what the OP has already posted. Implying the prospective tenants have rights other than the OP elects to confer on them- is not helpful- and is at least in part how they are in their current situation. Please consider where the OP is coming from- and give him/her advice that is not contrary to their best interests.

Grolschevik

The_Conductor wrote:

The OP is an owner occupier- and is not under any obligation to confer any rights to a prospective housemate- they have no rights under the amended Residential Tenancies Act- and can be asked to vacate a property with no notice- or reason. Please reread what the OP has already posted. Implying the prospective tenants have rights other than the OP elects to confer on them- is not helpful- and is at least in part how they are in their current situation. Please consider where the OP is coming from- and give him/her advice that is not contrary to their best interests.

But the OP *has* used a rental agreement of some sort. The question becomes what rights does this contract confer on the licensee over and above what is set out in law.

Paulw

Grolschevik wrote: »

But the OP *has* used a rental agreement of some sort. The question becomes what rights does this contract confer on the licensee over and above what is set out in law.

Since there is nothing in law, then the contract/agreement could be a binding contract. A contract cannot remove rights given under law, but can give rights above what is in law.

The advice about going forward was to not give a contract/lease in future, since that would restrict their legal rights.

4ensic15

The_Conductor wrote: »

The OP is an owner occupier- and is not under any obligation to confer any rights to a prospective housemate- they have no rights under the amended Residential Tenancies Act- and can be asked to vacate a property with no notice- or reason. Please reread what the OP has already posted. Implying the prospective tenants have rights other than the OP elects to confer on them- is not helpful- and is at least in part how they are in their current situation. Please consider where the OP is coming from- and give him/her advice that is not contrary to their best interests.

How can a party to a contract not have rights? The o/p has given a lease and he is stuck with it. I am dealing with what he might have done. i have not said any tenant has rights other than they are given.

4ensic15

4ensic15 wrote: »

How can a party to a contract not have rights? The o/p has given a lease and he is stuck with it. I am dealing with what he might have done. i have not said any tenant has rights other than they are given.

The question is who is going to enforce these rights? The RTB can't, courts won't be interested etc.

Its very very foolish to give a contract to a licensee, I would never give a licensee anything to sign absolutely nothing as it will only give them the impression that they have rights that they don't have but even if they are given a contract there isn't really anyone to enforce it and that's if its even binding which is a very big "if".

Similar to how a contract cannot overrule tenancy rights can a licensees contract over rule the fact they have no rights?

davindub

You can seek redress in the courts if the RTB legislation does not cover the contract, some would even call it an advantage.

A few people are missing the point about about contracts in general. A contract can have any term a person can think of in there. But any contract term that conflicts with legislation is void, but not necessarily the whole contract. Also the term itself may be questionable, but it would be a mistake to think that someone renting a room in your house has no rights because they are not covered by legislation, we have common law regarding contracts to consider also.

As well as the terms within the contract, they are as a minimum entitled to what they have paid for, without harassment. But you can assume terms regarding practice in the industry & notice required, it must be reasonable notice anyway. But equally if there is conflict and the tenant is the aggressor (tenant is not only a RTB term, it just has special meaning in a RTB context), it would be most practical to dispense with the notice or reduce it.

Anyway OP, unfortunately, the tenant can refuse permission, but you are entitled to collect money for bills if that was the agreement, you can withhold the amount from the deposit if needed. Anyway, 2 weeks and its all over, it just one of the risks of renting rooms.

4ensic15

Julieta Shy Sextant wrote: »

The question is who is going to enforce these rights? The RTB can't, courts won't be interested etc.

Its very very foolish to give a contract to a licensee, I would never give a licensee anything to sign absolutely nothing as it will only give them the impression that they have rights that they don't have but even if they are given a contract there isn't really anyone to enforce it and that's if its even binding which is a very big "if".

Similar to how a contract cannot overrule tenancy rights can a licensees contract over rule the fact they have no rights?

The courts have no choice. It is their job to enforce agreements. A contract can be made orally as well as in writing., Every licensee automatically has a contract of some sort. there is no advantage in not reducing the contract to writing and there are many advantages. There is statute laws relating to tenancies which limits contracting out. The law relating to licencees is governed mostly by common law. Each party to a contract has rights and obligations. the rights may not be the same as the rights a tenant has, but they are rights nonetheless.

athtrasna

Mod note

Straying way too close to legal advice now. Not permitted on Boards so let's move on. Thanks