Is a tenant a tenant if they don't pay rent?

arctictree

Won't into the detail background detail here but we have a small house that a friend stays in. The agreement is that he doesn't pay rent but pays for any upkeep and maintenance. Is this person covered under the rental legislation? Thanks

handlemaster

arctictree wrote: »

Won't into the detail background detail here but we have a small house that a friend stays in. The agreement is that he doesn't pay rent but pays for any upkeep and maintenance. Is this person covered under the rental legislation? Thanks

All the makings for future trouble here

Gumbo

arctictree wrote: »

Won't into the detail background detail here but we have a small house that a friend stays in. The agreement is that he doesn't pay rent but pays for any upkeep and maintenance. Is this person covered under the rental legislation? Thanks

Yes I would think so.
Sticky situation here.

runawaybishop

arctictree wrote: »

Won't into the detail background detail here but we have a small house that a friend stays in. The agreement is that he doesn't pay rent but pays for any upkeep and maintenance. Is this person covered under the rental legislation? Thanks

He's not a tenant, that's a caretaker agreement you have entered into.

Did you get anything in writing?

overkill602

After 6 months they are entitled to part 4 which is 6 years and subject all tenancy rights

arctictree

runawaybishop wrote: »

He's not a tenant, that's a caretaker agreement you have entered into.

Did you get anything in writing?

No, nothing in writing. He's basically looking after the house for us so it doesn't go derelict.

arctictree

overkill602 wrote: »

After 6 months they are entitled to part 4 which is 6 years and subject all tenancy rights

Even though he's a caretaker and not a tenant? See post above.

arctictree

handlemaster wrote: »

All the makings for future trouble here

How so? He gets a house for free and we get it looked after? Seems like a good arrangement.

Marcusm

arctictree wrote: »

Won't into the detail background detail here but we have a small house that a friend stays in. The agreement is that he doesn't pay rent but pays for any upkeep and maintenance. Is this person covered under the rental legislation? Thanks

If no rent is payable for the property then it is not a “dwelling”, the occupier is not a “tenant” (the definition of which applies only to a “dwelling”) and you are not a “landlord” (statutorily defined by reference to the person entitled to receive rent in respect if a “dwelling”).

HOWEVER, if you are in receipt if any payments from them as a consequence of their occupation of the property, that would likely constitute rent. (As opposed to (say) a situation where you permit a person to occupy the property but they must pay their own electricity bill, cut the grass etc.)

handlemaster

arctictree wrote: »

How so? He gets a house for free and we get it looked after? Seems like a good arrangement.

The innocence of your statement. 100% will be a future issue. I wont leave, I now have rights, pay me for maintaining the property etc etc. The world is full of these good meaning arrangements that go wrong. No good deed goes unpunished. Best of luck with it.

Pkiernan

arctictree wrote: »

How so? He gets a house for free and we get it looked after? Seems like a good arrangement.

Until you want him out, and he has nowhere to go.

You might as well say it’s their house at this stage. Crazy situation to get into.

Ap2020

Marcusm wrote: »

If no rent is payable for the property then it is not a “dwelling”, the occupier is not a “tenant” (the definition of which applies only to a “dwelling”) and you are not a “landlord” (statutorily defined by reference to the person entitled to receive rent in respect if a “dwelling”).

HOWEVER, if you are in receipt if any payments from them as a consequence of their occupation of the property, that would likely constitute rent. (As opposed to (say) a situation where you permit a person to occupy the property but they must pay their own electricity bill, cut the grass etc.)

"Rent" isn't defined in the Residential Tenancies Acts, and the definition of dwelling includes "valuable consideration". A Tribunal could easily construe the maintenance work as consideration for the occupation of the dwelling.

OP is probably, in the very truest sense, an accidental landlord...

El_Duderino 09

Pkiernan wrote: »

Until you want him out, and he has nowhere to go.

Certainly nowhere to go with even nearly as good terms. The next landlord will want them to pay money for rent. If they're any way inclined towards causing trouble or are short of money, they could easily turn on the OP.

No matter what there will be a means to get them out and since rent isn’t being charged there is no risk of the person stopping paying rent during the eviction process.

Also just because these situations could do wrong doesn’t mean that they do, you just hear about the very odd case where it didn’t work out.

runawaybishop

Ap2020 wrote: »

"Rent" isn't defined in the Residential Tenancies Acts, and the definition of dwelling includes "valuable consideration". A Tribunal could easily construe the maintenance work as consideration for the occupation of the dwelling.

OP is probably, in the very truest sense, an accidental landlord...

Maintenance work only would show it was a caretakers agreement, not that hes a tenant.

Ap2020

runawaybishop wrote: »

Maintenance work only would show it was a caretakers agreement, not that hes a tenant.

For the purposes of the Residential Tenancies Acts, what is the distinction between a "caretaker agreement" and a tenancy? The Acts envisage the exchange of "valuable consideration", which obviously includes conducting and paying for maintenance, in the definition of dwellings covered by the Acts.

SetOverSet

S3(1) states that "...this Act applies to every dwelling, the subject of a tenancy". The question, I suppose, is whether this property is the subject of a tenancy. OP, you say there is an agreement whereby the occupier doesn't pay rent but does pays for any upkeep and maintenance.

Valuable consideration is not defined in the Act, but it does not have to be of monetary value. It may be an obligation assumed or a benefit to the other party, such as the upkeep and maintenance of a property, for example.

And, while there is no tenancy in writing, a tenancy may be oral and may be implied. It could be argued that one might be implied in the current situation from the agreement that this person is entitled to occupation of the property in return for taking care of the upkeep and maintenance.

the_syco

arctictree wrote: »

Is this person covered under the rental legislation? Thanks

Would advise that you visit the house at least twice a year, with a 3rd party present.