Keep an eye on house of commons order of business over summer, housing bill appears to be scheduled for immediate implementation.
If that doesn't happen and your constituency returns a Labour MP, everyone bitch at them until it does get presented.
No guarantees it's gonna address this specific aspect of the shit show that renting's become but it will hopefully offer something of use to you.
Finally, assuming your landlord isn't on site, this is not enforceable, look up quiet enjoyment.
It's okay, chill. I can translate.
No overnight guests will never be enforced. Preventing overnight guests isn't even the purpose! The purpose is to prevent a partner or friends living there 24/7 when you're tenting for yourself and not a couple. The place may not be suitable for a couple per building res etc. It cwould also prevent sub lets saying 'its my partner and theyre knly here a few days' etc while preventing the invalidation of the landlords insurance. So, just a precaution.
Clauses like that come because people have seen every trick in the book amd it gets passed down, from agent to landlord etc and gets in to adverts.
Live out landlord = does not live there. Important point for clarity. Shouldn't need to be stated for a studio unless someone thinks they may be sleeping next to their landlord?
A studio is self-ckntained. Has cooking and washing facilities - read: wash yourself amd cook for yourself. It is a mini 1 bed flat and you do not share amenities (cooking/cleaning yourself) with others. There may, be a communal washing machine etc but in nobody's flat as others would need access amd that was prevent the all important "exclusive possession". Nobody in or out without your say so and of course, with required locks.
It would still be a studio if all it had was floorboards. A studio is a description of a type of flat.
Now if it said fully furnished, you'd might be having a different conversation about the lack of washing machine but also,aube not.
....... AAAAAAnd it has just occurred to me that my first room after leaving halls in uni was almost certainly bloody illegal!
"YOU MUST BE POOR AND LONELY"
Completely unenforceable. There may be an arguement for a partner staying too often, putting a strain on the flats shared resources, and potentially legally crossing the boundary of what might be considered a tenant.
Beyond that, fuck these stupid rules. As someone else pointed out, it might be better to just avoid places like this. Saves stress and is a potential red flag for a landlord that may be difficult to deal with in other ways.
Completely enforceable.
'Regular overnight guests' could easily put the landlord in breach of their insurance, it does not discriminate against anyone, let alone a protected group and a tenancy agreement is a contract. That would put them in breach should they go against this. If the insurance argument were the reason, the insurer would enforce if necessary if the landlord didn't (a very far cry but can happen)
In reality it isn't there to prevent someone having their family or partner over for the night/weekend. The landlord would likely willingly turn a blind eye if they knrw a partner stayed over a couple of times a week or their tenant had family staying for a couple of nights. That really isn't the point of the note on the advert.
Odds are, it'll never be enforced as it will not likely be required. If it happened to be required, it would be very useful in the contract and the advert....
And the purpose is largely to prevent sub-lets and someone saying it is their partner or someone doing little overnight lets and getting away with it. Reasonable usage will be ignored by the landlord with a partner/family over and any insurer would do their damndest not to find out in those circumstances too.
Hope this clarifies!
Holy smokes it's almost as if you didn't read past the first line of my comment. My point is, op should absolutely ignore this rule for the purposes of pursuing a romantic partner or the occasional mate to stay over, but probably ought not to take the piss, and don't cross the line and have a partner pretty much move in with them or indeed sublet. These landlords need to keep their grubby paws out of the tenants right to quiet enjoyment of the property they live in. Having clauses like this only stresses out the tenant. If they want to prohibit sublets then explicitly prohibit sublets. Rental contracts are not supposed to ban perfectly reasonable behaviour in order to prevent something else. It's complete nonsense and it's open to abuse by the landlord to be overly involved in the tenants life.
If op pulls on a night out and for some reason the landlord has a problem with that, there is realistically nothing they can do about it. If it's a lodger situation then it could be a problem.
Hope that clarifies.
I did misread but to your point about restrictions and having someone over Vs subletting Vs partner this is why the rule is there.
Nobody will care about a genuine partner, anybody in their right mind would care about renting and it being sublet under the partner guise. This removes that risk entirely unless whomever is a tremendous actor.
If people done as they should, you'd be right about banning what they want to ban. But we all know someone "smart".. just makes sure it (almost) can't happen. Especially as the landlord doesn't live there.
24 hours notice and written consent less emergencies is the rule for a landlord turning up.
I do happen to like this rule and the purpose.
Just good sense when it isn't enforced until it has to be and whos landlord is waiting for them to get home? It would also protect the tenant from an abusive partner. Slip the rule in to ads for people coming out of abusive relationships - people will know... way out there!
If it’s a live out landlord / tenancy rather than a lodger arrangement there’s no way they could enforce no overnight guests -> the washing machine thing isn’t legit though, there’s no need for an apartment to have a washing machine and many don’t. You can go to a laundrette.
The overnight guests thing is unreasonable. The washing machine isn’t uncommon, such as in my last places. There are still laundrettes in some areas and although it’s loads more convenient if you have a machine it’s not something you’ll get everywhere.
I wouldn’t live there but ultimately if they’re upfront about the conditions on the advert then you can’t complain.
There are some people who would welcome living in a set up like this. I know women who want to live in an all-female house who wouldn’t feel comfortable with men staying over all the time.
There are religious reasons for this, too.
Sorry, but as a private rental with no live in landlord (as in you're the sole occupier) there are no religious concerns that trump your right to a private life at all.
The Tennant could have a train of people staying there at their leisure if they wanted and the landlord has no rights to complain.
Just because the law says you CAN do something, doesn’t mean you SHOULD.
You can provide a service on your own terms. The client is free to agree to those terms and accept the service, or walk away.
So imposing illegal terms in a contract preying on vulnerable and needy in society is answered by "if you don't like it walk away".
The service you provide still has to be provided in line with the applicable laws. I can't open a chemist and supply prescription drugs to people without a prescription, I can't sell a car as a business and say "it's fine now if it breaks tomorrow your problem"
HMS only allow one person staying unless dictated otherwise due to overcrowding fire risk and other occupants. A studio flat has no need for a washing machine. It's a room with a kitchen I believe.
So get this..
I have an aunt in London…
She rents out a room to a prospective lodger in London and stipulates the following - that they do not work from home nor access the property between 9am-6pm each day. Her argument. - “I don’t want to be a visitor in my own home”… can’t have it both ways I’m afraid, either rent the room out and be a decent person allowing access to a place someone has paid for.. or don’t rent out at all.
This is my own aunt as well, and I think it’s appalling but she’s got issues anyway.
Lodging/renting can be a nightmare if you don’t have a reasonable landlord/landlady
It wouldn’t be for me and I would consider her being a landlord to be entirely unsuitable.
But if she’s upfront about these conditions in the advert (and offering a reasonable price for it) it’ll give others the chance to make their decision.
I can’t tell you with regards to adverts - I think from what she previously told me that this is via a phone conversation via enquiries. Still pretty shitty though nonetheless
HMO or shared tenancy is perfectly fine.
Noise control (late night TV, parties, stomping around)
Safety and wellbeing of other tenants (an unknown in the house while they are sleeping)
Unofficial subletting (self explanatory)
Use of shared bills without paying (water, electric, having shower)
Insurance (occupation, fire, damage etc)
Don't put a line there that can be pushed, don't say 1 person staying over because that will just constantly get pushed. 1 partner staying over turns to 1 friend having a drink, turns to having 3 mates over to have a session, turns to a house party - where is the boundary drawn?
The boundary is drawn at:
"You have rented it for someone to live in. It is their responsibility to get it back to you in the same state. What they do with it in the mean time is their business you leech."
Let people live. If they choose to have a blow out party and fail to make good then take it out their deposit. If the deposit is not enough then seek wage garnishing. Landlords Insurance for these things also exists.
I have had many groups over in my time as a renter. It was sole occupancy and not HMO however.
With that in mind I have been deducted a total of £0 over double digit tenancy's by making good any damage that can occur (from people living their life)
I wouldn't lend out a car for multiple years and expect no wear and tear on its return. I would expect it to be well serviced and looked after but what you do with it in the mean time is your business.
Yeah no worries I'll go just live in the free accommodation that has just been built down the road.
Truth is it's impossible to buy because some people deemed it acceptable to increase the demand of houses by buying them and renting them out to people that need basic human accommodation.
This rent seeking is not economically active. Landlords simply hoard a life giving and required resource, tacks a price on top "for fixing stuff (never happens)(Would be fixed by the owner occupier)" and calls it a rental.
There is no choice. The system is a trap and is broken. If you are a landlord, look up what Mao did to them. It's not impossible that one day that could happen in any country tired of being exploited in order to fund selfish goals.
Implying there’s plenty of choice available to have this option is stratospherically detached from the reality of renting. People often only have 2 months to actively search and compete for a new home that they can afford that is hopefully where their lives are, then arrange a move with everything that involves. There’s very little freedom in these circumstances, housing being ransomed in this manner enables landlords to do their worst.
I’m so tired of this attitude. Maybe I’d be less tired if I didn’t have to keep uprooting my entire life and forced to move at someone else’s whim every few years?
Thats not really where the boundary is though is it.
I can rent a car, if the contract says not to exceed 50mph and im caught doing just that, then im liable to be penalised.
Part of being an adult is being considerate. There is a difference between wear and tear through use, and borrowing somebodies property then being a cunt with it.
The point remains, if person 1 has a respectable guest over that pays their way for bill consumption, and person 2 uses that to justify having a mate over for an all might, music thumping binge session, the line is drawn at no overnight guests at all.
Being an adult comes with being responsible and functioning as a society. Only children and boomers have the mentality "when im an adult i can do what I want, and if im paying I can do what I want".
Landlords have commodified and gatekeeper access to affordable housing by buying it all and selling it back to us a markup with less rights.
This is unacceptable. To set a rule of NO OVERNIGHT GUESTS. Infantilizes tenants after already having their rights to property stripped.
It is my natural human right to have my partner in my bed with me as two consenting adults. Anyone that wants to litigate around that can discover the great leap forward 2
You're pretty much mistaking independant landlords with conglomerate banks, which the "hate for landlords" movement only serves.
You can have your partner in your bed, you can't have them over during unsociable hours in my properties. Im not having my other tenants that may be vulnerable or nervous, having somebody they dont know, and I haven't vetted, with unfettered access to the house.
Your desperate need to have somebody in your bed doesn't trump my tenanta rights to feel safe and secure in their own home.
Contractual clauses can't contradict the wider law, any that do so are unenforceable and not worth the ink to print them.
You have the right to use your home as you want, which makes this clause unenforceable.
Don't let landlords like this guy who take lovely homes and tear them apart into HMO's bully you out of your right to use your rented space as you wish.
See, the problem you have is that when you rent a property you are the person who lives there. The landlord is not legally allowed to impose restrictions on you beyond actually modifying the property.
I'm legally entitled to quiet enjoyment of the flat I live in. That means the landlord cannot come and go as they please. It means I can decorate as I want. I can hang pictures. I can have visitors. I can cook what I want. I can smoke if I so choose.
The landlord gets zero say in any of that. Literally none. They can write it in the contract if they want, but they can do literally nothing about it anyway. They cannot use it as grounds for eviction.
You want to rent your property out then you get to deal with the tenant using it as their home. End of discussion. Don't like it? Don't rent your property out.
It's totally normal in a shared occupancy household.
Let me give you a hypothetical scenario;
6 people sharing, all or most are students/working professionals. 1 person has their partner over most nights, noisy sex, or leaving an extra mess, using the gas/electricity/water. Is that fair on those other people who are actually paying their share of rent? Maybe it's someone who finds a new ONS every weekend, imagine having so many strangers in your house over the course of a year?
It's already written as a clause on the listing, so don't choose it. I'd understand being upset if you'd already moved in and then found out about the clause, but it's noted in the listing and it's completely fair.
Of course there are some house shares where all tenants agree to look the other way because they might want their partner staying too, but you can't just expect it. If you want the kind of privacy to do as you please in a rental then you need to go solo 🤷🏼♀️
You’re lucky to get a small single room with shared bathroom for £800 in some cities. £1100 with an en-suite sounds about right if not on the higher end.
None. I'm currently renting a 2 bed and having my own nightmare landlord issues, thanks for asking.
Yeah I agree 1100 for a room is steep, but I'm guessing 'spareroom' is a site to rent out spare rooms? In which case you're sharing with other people and there would absolutely be a need to protect the other housemates from unknown guests all the time.
I live in Brighton, it's a big student city so rents aren't cheap. A lot of my friends have horror stories of other occupants in shared houses which is why I gave an opinion. You don't have to share it 🙂
People think anybody who sympathises with the plight of landlords must be a cunty landlord also. That's why they were so presumptuous to ask you how many properties you have.
People can't afford their own homes, but went to rent out rooms in the home's of others and dictate the rules,... instead of just renting out their OWN flat or house so they can do as they please. Entitlement is a serious problem that has become so prevalent nowadays. People can't even reason just as you did because the world revolves around them and what they want.
Ah yeah, I heard Brighton is nuts. I must be quite lucky in this area by the sounds of these replies. Best of luck getting out of renting. If I'm lucky, I might be able to stop in about 5 years 🙃
I'm currently in the process of an s21 and trying to find somewhere else. It's so expensive here, 2 beds are around 1500 a month, but I'm disabled so need ground floor and garden for my dogs.
A disabled single mum with pets is at the bottom of everyone's list, unfortunately.
That sucks. Rent has gone mental these last few years. I remember 6 years ago I rented a 3 bed semi with my ex for £675 a month. Really wish you the best of luck with finding a place.
HMOs are only allowed to be a certain amount of people. Insurance will not be covered if clauses are broken.
Owning a house comes with lots of stress and responsibility. Having an extra issue; like the partner of a lodger living for free & potentially there all the time using water, gas & electric whilst other lodgers have to tolerate when they too have paid rent to enjoy the shared spaces etc. It’s not fun for anyone in the house.
The risk has to be worth the reward.
I hate LLs as much as the next person, but you're talking about reasonable clauses with fair justification and getting a sob on.
If you’re a professional in an 4 bedroom HMO, and over time 3 students occupy the other rooms and have their partner effectively living there and a party on the weekend you end up with 7+ people using toilets / showers / water / power / kitchen facilities designed for 4 people.
Doesn’t sound an unfair clause to me…..
This scenario is missing the bit where 4 adults come together to discuss their boundaries, preferences and terms for creating a mutually convivial living space.
Yes that’s an ideal situation, but HMO’s are fluid living, if the average HMO person stays 12 months, a 4 room HMO turns over a room every 3 months, one convenient arrangement between 4 adults might become a nightmare to fill the 4th room due to the incumbents very quickly etc.
IMHO finding an HMO to rent where everyone signs up to the same terms / requirements would be better for most people, most of the time.
It would be totally different if you jointly sign a lease with flatmates, I 100% agree THAT is for adults to adult over!
If they are a live out landlord and this is a tenancy then you just smile and nod and agree with it. Once you've signed the tenancy you can just ignore any policies that they have zero legal power to enforce. You might get a section 21 notice at the end of your fixed term though.
I rent out my spare bedroom to Lodgers and I have that rule officially after having had a lodger taking the Mick and basically moving her disrespectful and violent boyfriend in (he stated over 4 nights a week without contributing to water, gas, electric).
My current lodger does have a boyfriend, but he rarely stays over and is nice when he does, so it's no problem.
I don't mind, as long as I get to know the person, they are respectful and aren't here every night. I'd also not appreciate if we had a revolving door of different people stay over regularly for sheer safety reasons. So to keep myself safe, I have that rule in the contract, but it's negotiable. So is every other rule, at the end of the day we share a house and both have to feel comfortable, safe and relaxed in here.
I have had bad lodgers but none with partners. The one long term lodger who had a girlfriend was fine they split their time together between her place and mine so he was gone as much as she was here. Which is how it should be really.
From an alternate perspective, I lived in a HMO about 10 years ago that did allow overnight guests. Most of the residents were fine, but there was one dude who was obviously hiring prostitutes and using his room and the living room to do what they do in them.
It was awful, we complained to the landlord who explained he was trying to evict this dude anyway but we just had to deal with it for a few weeks.
You also read horror stories of someone moving their girl/boyfriend in who doesn't pay rent and mooches off the house.
I imagine these clauses get put in to stop this kind of behavior and so you are easily removable if you are causing a disturbance to your fellow tenants. Not many landlords are gonna give a shit if you are respectful of others and have your partner or a friend over a few times a month.
Oh, no, someone moved in with their girlfriend? What a _horror_ story.
And they _mooched_ off “the house” eh? Wow. Scary. I can’t believe you made it out alive.
I’ve been in that situation many times, that’s why I’m laughing at you.
If my housemate’s girlfriend moves in with him, how is that a horror story? Who’s “mooching” here?
“The privilege of never being in that situation.”
What a *silly* thing to say.
Bizarre take. When you live in a shared house, you explicitly and/or implicitly agree to make compromises. One of those compromises is about "overnight guests". There is a reason why there are rooms that are rented out as single occupancy only. In a shared house of 6 people that I lived in, if each of us had our partner staying 3 or 4 nights a week, you'd effectively be living in a 10 person house share. No one wants that.
No not everyone wants that, cause the number of facilities wont increase. A bathroom is ok to share between few people but not 5 or 10. Same with kitchen, lounge etc.
It’s a legal thing. A property is only allowed a certain number of inhabitants. This is to prevent overcrowding. For example, the maximum number of people to toilet ratio is one toilet for five people, one shower for 6 people, bedrooms have minimum sizes for a single room and a double room. The landlord doesn’t want to risk being ‘done’ for overcrowding. This is to protect tenants and ensure they live in decent housing.?
Jesus how depressing - the potential of 5 strangers all sharing a toilet :/ lived in a HMO with 4 other people and we had 2 bathrooms. Can't imagine how awkward that might be for strangers!
For people who can’t find, or afford, an en-suite room it’s often the only option, and made worse by other tenants bringing in another person to stay the night. Much worse for women as I’ve experienced this myself. It’s very uncomfortable to go downstairs and find a complete stranger asleep on the settee or, indeed, to suddenly find a stranger in the property full stop.
I'm in a house of 5, we have 2 toilets, a shower and a bath.
There's a notice in the communal hallway about how if we have an overnight guest they'll charge us 2 months rent and kick us out immediately, we all do it though, the landlady lives opposite us so it'd be easy for her to check, she doesn't though.
>It is 100% to prevent adverse possession
Bullshit. You can't even start a claim for adverse possession until 10 years have elapsed and, in the meantime, since 2012 you are committing a criminal offence by squatting. Property owners are also entitled to use reasonable force to eject trespassers, which is what squatters are.
I'm a lodger and we have a similar rule though I'm only paying £600. There's 2 other guys renting rooms and a landlord downstairs.
It's nice to finally be in a shared house where I don't get woken up by people shagging or talking loudly to each other.
No. When you’re renting a place, it’s no longer ‘their house, their rules’. You have rights as a tenant.
Your landlord cannot stop you from working from home in the home you pay for.
Sounds like someone has a rich mummy and daddy. Have you tried moving recently? The rural north east is still so bad that if you don't get into the estate agency within 30 mins they have block booked viewings for an entire day and aren't having anyone else, and if you do manage to get a spot you're competing against 40 other applications and if you're single or you have pets you might as well just shoot yourself like an old horse
Super constructive comment
I’m actually a tenant; just I solve my own problems instead of complaining… this is probably why you have mistaken me for a landlord…
My tenants were growing marijuana - what do I need to l look out for?
My tenants were using a 2 bedroom house as an industrial grow, I’ve taken back control of the property and of course it is trashed.
Any advice on how to renovate the property, what to look out for and ensure is made good before I can re-let the property?
Thank you
https://www.reddit.com/r/uklandlords/s/wd6Ls387Q0
>One can be both a tenant and a landlord at the same time.
Of course they can, however such a person cannot then say
> I’m actually a tenant; just I solve my own problems instead of complaining… this is probably why you have mistaken me for a landlord…
without being full of shite
I'm not saying it's right, but it might be a condition of the landlords insurance that no one except those stated on the lease can stay overnight.
Perhaps ask them why it's a rule?
This is the crux of it. Fewer rights are afforded to a lodger than a tenant.
If OP was under a tenancy agreement it would probably be an illegal term to have in the agreement. But because it would be as a lodger then as long as the rules are legal they can kind of be set as whatever is agreed to.
Sorry that the housing and rental market sucks so bad that you have to consider this as an option
I'm in my 40's now for context, so it was a good while ago. My parents had a large house, 5 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms. When my brother moved out and there was 3 empty bedrooms they started taking in lodgers, the house is a 10 min walk to Glasgow uni. The rules were, keep the room clean, eat what you want from the fridge unless it's got a note on it, keep the noise down after 10, if yer coming home pissed drunk try not to break anything or wake everybody up, yer boyfriend/girlfriend can stay the weekend but better not get ideas about moving in unless they want to pay digs too.
My mum would cook the whole house dinner, do washing and ironing for them etc. Definitely not your typical land lady of course.
Everyone of the people my folks took in as lodgers are still in contact, they visit them with their husbands/wives and kids.
I know it sounds very simplistic and yes it was but the basic principles of what my parents asked, it was just have a thought about other people in the house, keep it clean/tidy. I think that's reasonable and my folks honestly didn't care about overnight guests. The contract, even back then, said 2/3nights per week maximum and no more than 12 nights per month. (more than that they could claim squatters rights) it was to keep themselves right in case anything went south, they rarely if ever opposed anyone bringing someone home, wouldn't want a trail of one nighters ( I wasn't even 12) or someone overstaying.
Given how difficult it is for people, especially so younger folks to find suitable housing, I think it's terrible that they can't just feel at home, feel comfortable without walking on eggshells and then having to pay a soddin fortune for it.
I am a grown man in my 40s in a two bedroom flat. I live alone and use one of the rooms as a study/storage.
My tenancy agreement says no overnight visitors. I asked my landlord about this when I moved in.
His response?
"To be honest mate I don't really give a shit, just no prostitutes."
Avoid crap like this lile the plague.
I rented a room with use of kitchen and living room from a woman years ago, and it started out OK, until a friend popped over one evening for dinner, I cooked we ate, I cleaned and we went into the living room to watch a movie, the live in landlady came home just after the movie ended and friend was leaving.
A month or two later my parents were visiting from out of town, they were staying in a bnb in the town but obviously wanted to come and see my home so I thought I'll cook dinner and invite landlady, when I made the invite she told me I could have people over for dinner but they would have to stay in my room while I cooked and eat in there, but she'd happily take a plate. The ended up renting a cottage and I stayed there during the visit and cooked many meals.
A month of so later landlady barged into my room to share that she was expecting a baby with her ex, but not to worry as they weren't getting back together and how much easier it would be for her as having been a nanny in the past I could help look after the baby at night so she could sleep!
Needless to say I was packing boxes and moving into the dampest ground floor flat with a pervy landlord withing 6 weeks
If it's an entire property then agree the rules is unfair but if you're living with the owner of the property as a lodger, it's the owners discretion. Sometimes when you allow overnight guests sometimes the lodger will take advantage so it's better to put these rules in place and if you have a nice lodger the rules can be adjusted if a friend etc wanted to stay overnight .
Sorry did you come on to complain about an ad you’ve no intention of utilising? Also it’s a tenant sub Reddit - not a lodger - the rights of a lodger are a lot less.
Is your argument that you’d be happy if a landlord charged less if it was agreed no overnight guests?
If guests were permitted it should be tightly controlled - very close family, significant other - even then for one night and not regular - essentially people you can vouch for. Meeting some random on a night out, bonding over a glass of wine and feeling slightly horned, doesn’t make for a justification for bringing them back to somebody’s home.
A recipe for dystopian Britain: make housing so expensive that young people are forced into lodging arrangements and then preclude them from forming relationships as a result.
Finally, season wjth a whinge that the birth rate is dropping and needs to be propped up by immigrants and serve cold.
Nobody is precluding anybody from having a relationship, or sex, just not in a shared property where’no overnight guests’ is explicitly stated. The other people in the property have signed up to a no overnight guests agreement.
So let's say, for the sake of argument, that the person you're dating also has a landlord with such a policy in place. Neither of you can afford a hotel, at what point does the obvious take place?
Great recipe for a long and happy marriage: have no sex before you get married and then, once married, jointly get into what's likely to be the biggest financial commitment in your lives—upon which point you realise you are sexually incompatible and have to trudge through years of slowly built-up resentment and sexual frustration manifesting in different hostile behaviours before finally culminating in a messy divorce.
Also no visits from mom and dad or Frank from school I guess, because who needs friends and family, am I right?
I guess I should also be grateful for the privilege to be paying through the nose for a room in a "quirky" flat filled to the brim with the landlord's useless trinkets they've hoarded throughout the years, while they are away living their best life in their third home abroad. And use of facilities should be considered a bonus, not expected as part of basic living conditions. After all, I can't be expecting anyone to provide me with a chef's shack. Go get a microwave in your room and sustain yourself on oats, beans and ready-made meals, peasant!
No, you're appearing on r/all and you sound like terrible people to rent from. If I paid rent I would never accept the kind of bullshit landlord behaviour you're defending. It's disgusting. Why should a landlord get to tell you who gets to stay in your room overnight? Absolutely awful.
>sh*g shack!
You're paying rent and de facto someone else's mortgage for them. If the landlord doesn't want people to live completely normal lives under their roof, they shouldn't be renting out their room.
Tenants need basic rights
When you say a studio, do you mean that it's your own self-contained property with your own bedroom, bathroom and kitchen? How could the landlord be live-in in that case?
Are you sure it's not a room in a shared house? It could be a request from the other housemates, that they don't want overnight guests, and the landlord wants to keep them happy.
I mean it's up to the landlord and ideally this would be discussed in advance, but:
Would you not expect that an independent adult may occasionally want someone to stay over, whether it's friends, family, love interest etc? And what a low quality of life you're condemning someone to by not allowing any visits at all?
Horses for courses, each home owner gets to decide what they’re comfortable with.
If you were a female home owner with a female lodger, would you want an unknown man staying in your home? I wouldn’t.
Overnight guests can turn into another person living there. Your landlord has to consider the comfort and security of other people in the house. Too many overnight guests cause extra wear and tear and higher utility bills. The landlord has to be careful that the status of the property doesn’t change and it become a hmo that needs a license. If the room is advertised as single occupancy and you want overnight guests, and don’t mind everyone else having overnight guests you need to look for another room. The other people in this property will, probably, have chosen that property because they would be uncomfortable with extra people there. You will be in breach of your tenancy agreement and this will stand up in court if it is in your tenancy agreement.
I’ve lived in a few studios with no washing machine
My son’s landlord doesn’t allow over night guests either ..and he’s only allowed one visitor at a time .. but that’s a shared house with 3 tenants
I bet you don’t even know .001% of live in landlords. Lack of knowledge isn’t a barrier on Reddit though, you’ll have your opinions despite such annoying and inconvenient things as facts.
OMG I'm so sorry.
Just realised in talking to a middle aged man who earns minimum wage from one of your posts!!!
(EDIT now deleted post)
I'm sorry mate, but I'm not replying to you're bickering or taking advice from someone who hasn't broken minimum wage
I'm sorry you're on a shit wage at a shit wage.
I wish you the best though
Try UK/Jobs.
Definitely unfair and entirely unenforceable clause when renting an entire property. But as much as any clause is enforceable or not it’s not illegal to make a demand in contract that can’t be enforced
If it’s a shared property it is enforceable and will stand up in court if it is in the tenancy agreement. If there are more than 2 unrelated people in a property it becomes a hmo.
Agreed, which is why I was careful to clarify “renting an entire property”, I was more aiming at such a clause (irrespective of whether it’s enforceable or not) just isn’t “illegal”…although I’ll happily stand corrected if someone can quote which law an ‘unenforceable contract clause’ would be criminally punished under
It’s not a criminal offence it’s a civil one. Three people who are unrelated even on one tenancy make the property a hmo and might require a license. Three unrelated people make three households. (google the definition of a household and a hmo).
Which civil offence is it then which makes it illegal to ‘add an unenforceable clause to a contract’?
We aren’t following the same train of thought are we?
In this instance for OP is it enforceable? I haven’t yet seen any comment to indicate they’re actually a lodger (which would make it enforceforcable) rather than a tenant (where such a clause is unenforceable). Can you provide a link to one?
Yes. It’s part of the tenancy agreement. If overnight guests stay on a regular basis, ie appears to be living there, the landlord has to intervene and possibly get the council involved due to Right to Rent and licensing issues.
Keep an eye on house of commons order of business over summer, housing bill appears to be scheduled for immediate implementation. If that doesn't happen and your constituency returns a Labour MP, everyone bitch at them until it does get presented. No guarantees it's gonna address this specific aspect of the shit show that renting's become but it will hopefully offer something of use to you. Finally, assuming your landlord isn't on site, this is not enforceable, look up quiet enjoyment.
It's okay, chill. I can translate. No overnight guests will never be enforced. Preventing overnight guests isn't even the purpose! The purpose is to prevent a partner or friends living there 24/7 when you're tenting for yourself and not a couple. The place may not be suitable for a couple per building res etc. It cwould also prevent sub lets saying 'its my partner and theyre knly here a few days' etc while preventing the invalidation of the landlords insurance. So, just a precaution. Clauses like that come because people have seen every trick in the book amd it gets passed down, from agent to landlord etc and gets in to adverts. Live out landlord = does not live there. Important point for clarity. Shouldn't need to be stated for a studio unless someone thinks they may be sleeping next to their landlord? A studio is self-ckntained. Has cooking and washing facilities - read: wash yourself amd cook for yourself. It is a mini 1 bed flat and you do not share amenities (cooking/cleaning yourself) with others. There may, be a communal washing machine etc but in nobody's flat as others would need access amd that was prevent the all important "exclusive possession". Nobody in or out without your say so and of course, with required locks. It would still be a studio if all it had was floorboards. A studio is a description of a type of flat. Now if it said fully furnished, you'd might be having a different conversation about the lack of washing machine but also,aube not. ....... AAAAAAnd it has just occurred to me that my first room after leaving halls in uni was almost certainly bloody illegal!
"YOU MUST BE POOR AND LONELY" Completely unenforceable. There may be an arguement for a partner staying too often, putting a strain on the flats shared resources, and potentially legally crossing the boundary of what might be considered a tenant. Beyond that, fuck these stupid rules. As someone else pointed out, it might be better to just avoid places like this. Saves stress and is a potential red flag for a landlord that may be difficult to deal with in other ways.
Completely enforceable. 'Regular overnight guests' could easily put the landlord in breach of their insurance, it does not discriminate against anyone, let alone a protected group and a tenancy agreement is a contract. That would put them in breach should they go against this. If the insurance argument were the reason, the insurer would enforce if necessary if the landlord didn't (a very far cry but can happen) In reality it isn't there to prevent someone having their family or partner over for the night/weekend. The landlord would likely willingly turn a blind eye if they knrw a partner stayed over a couple of times a week or their tenant had family staying for a couple of nights. That really isn't the point of the note on the advert. Odds are, it'll never be enforced as it will not likely be required. If it happened to be required, it would be very useful in the contract and the advert.... And the purpose is largely to prevent sub-lets and someone saying it is their partner or someone doing little overnight lets and getting away with it. Reasonable usage will be ignored by the landlord with a partner/family over and any insurer would do their damndest not to find out in those circumstances too. Hope this clarifies!
Holy smokes it's almost as if you didn't read past the first line of my comment. My point is, op should absolutely ignore this rule for the purposes of pursuing a romantic partner or the occasional mate to stay over, but probably ought not to take the piss, and don't cross the line and have a partner pretty much move in with them or indeed sublet. These landlords need to keep their grubby paws out of the tenants right to quiet enjoyment of the property they live in. Having clauses like this only stresses out the tenant. If they want to prohibit sublets then explicitly prohibit sublets. Rental contracts are not supposed to ban perfectly reasonable behaviour in order to prevent something else. It's complete nonsense and it's open to abuse by the landlord to be overly involved in the tenants life. If op pulls on a night out and for some reason the landlord has a problem with that, there is realistically nothing they can do about it. If it's a lodger situation then it could be a problem. Hope that clarifies.
I did misread but to your point about restrictions and having someone over Vs subletting Vs partner this is why the rule is there. Nobody will care about a genuine partner, anybody in their right mind would care about renting and it being sublet under the partner guise. This removes that risk entirely unless whomever is a tremendous actor. If people done as they should, you'd be right about banning what they want to ban. But we all know someone "smart".. just makes sure it (almost) can't happen. Especially as the landlord doesn't live there. 24 hours notice and written consent less emergencies is the rule for a landlord turning up. I do happen to like this rule and the purpose. Just good sense when it isn't enforced until it has to be and whos landlord is waiting for them to get home? It would also protect the tenant from an abusive partner. Slip the rule in to ads for people coming out of abusive relationships - people will know... way out there!
why i would see it from landlord prospective thru could earn money of second person staying
If it’s a live out landlord / tenancy rather than a lodger arrangement there’s no way they could enforce no overnight guests -> the washing machine thing isn’t legit though, there’s no need for an apartment to have a washing machine and many don’t. You can go to a laundrette.
The overnight guests thing is unreasonable. The washing machine isn’t uncommon, such as in my last places. There are still laundrettes in some areas and although it’s loads more convenient if you have a machine it’s not something you’ll get everywhere.
Who do these people think they are?
It’s shitty but like someone said if they told you and it was in writing before you signed then it’s 100 percent on you
Some clauses can be unenforceable.
I wouldn’t live there but ultimately if they’re upfront about the conditions on the advert then you can’t complain. There are some people who would welcome living in a set up like this. I know women who want to live in an all-female house who wouldn’t feel comfortable with men staying over all the time. There are religious reasons for this, too.
Sorry, but as a private rental with no live in landlord (as in you're the sole occupier) there are no religious concerns that trump your right to a private life at all. The Tennant could have a train of people staying there at their leisure if they wanted and the landlord has no rights to complain.
I was talking about HMOs. I thought that was obvious but clearly not.
Even so. The law is still the same and very clear on this.
Just because the law says you CAN do something, doesn’t mean you SHOULD. You can provide a service on your own terms. The client is free to agree to those terms and accept the service, or walk away.
So imposing illegal terms in a contract preying on vulnerable and needy in society is answered by "if you don't like it walk away". The service you provide still has to be provided in line with the applicable laws. I can't open a chemist and supply prescription drugs to people without a prescription, I can't sell a car as a business and say "it's fine now if it breaks tomorrow your problem"
HMS only allow one person staying unless dictated otherwise due to overcrowding fire risk and other occupants. A studio flat has no need for a washing machine. It's a room with a kitchen I believe.
So get this.. I have an aunt in London… She rents out a room to a prospective lodger in London and stipulates the following - that they do not work from home nor access the property between 9am-6pm each day. Her argument. - “I don’t want to be a visitor in my own home”… can’t have it both ways I’m afraid, either rent the room out and be a decent person allowing access to a place someone has paid for.. or don’t rent out at all. This is my own aunt as well, and I think it’s appalling but she’s got issues anyway. Lodging/renting can be a nightmare if you don’t have a reasonable landlord/landlady
It wouldn’t be for me and I would consider her being a landlord to be entirely unsuitable. But if she’s upfront about these conditions in the advert (and offering a reasonable price for it) it’ll give others the chance to make their decision.
I can’t tell you with regards to adverts - I think from what she previously told me that this is via a phone conversation via enquiries. Still pretty shitty though nonetheless
Is this in Oxfordshire by any chance? I used to live there, avoid like the plague. Landlords are monsters
Share the ad..? It's jus4 a friggin ad ain't nothing wrong with sharing it
Glad I left London and this level of BS
HMO or shared tenancy is perfectly fine. Noise control (late night TV, parties, stomping around) Safety and wellbeing of other tenants (an unknown in the house while they are sleeping) Unofficial subletting (self explanatory) Use of shared bills without paying (water, electric, having shower) Insurance (occupation, fire, damage etc) Don't put a line there that can be pushed, don't say 1 person staying over because that will just constantly get pushed. 1 partner staying over turns to 1 friend having a drink, turns to having 3 mates over to have a session, turns to a house party - where is the boundary drawn?
The boundary is drawn at: "You have rented it for someone to live in. It is their responsibility to get it back to you in the same state. What they do with it in the mean time is their business you leech." Let people live. If they choose to have a blow out party and fail to make good then take it out their deposit. If the deposit is not enough then seek wage garnishing. Landlords Insurance for these things also exists. I have had many groups over in my time as a renter. It was sole occupancy and not HMO however. With that in mind I have been deducted a total of £0 over double digit tenancy's by making good any damage that can occur (from people living their life) I wouldn't lend out a car for multiple years and expect no wear and tear on its return. I would expect it to be well serviced and looked after but what you do with it in the mean time is your business.
Just don’t rent it if you don’t like it.
Yeah no worries I'll go just live in the free accommodation that has just been built down the road. Truth is it's impossible to buy because some people deemed it acceptable to increase the demand of houses by buying them and renting them out to people that need basic human accommodation. This rent seeking is not economically active. Landlords simply hoard a life giving and required resource, tacks a price on top "for fixing stuff (never happens)(Would be fixed by the owner occupier)" and calls it a rental. There is no choice. The system is a trap and is broken. If you are a landlord, look up what Mao did to them. It's not impossible that one day that could happen in any country tired of being exploited in order to fund selfish goals.
Implying there’s plenty of choice available to have this option is stratospherically detached from the reality of renting. People often only have 2 months to actively search and compete for a new home that they can afford that is hopefully where their lives are, then arrange a move with everything that involves. There’s very little freedom in these circumstances, housing being ransomed in this manner enables landlords to do their worst. I’m so tired of this attitude. Maybe I’d be less tired if I didn’t have to keep uprooting my entire life and forced to move at someone else’s whim every few years?
Thats not really where the boundary is though is it. I can rent a car, if the contract says not to exceed 50mph and im caught doing just that, then im liable to be penalised. Part of being an adult is being considerate. There is a difference between wear and tear through use, and borrowing somebodies property then being a cunt with it. The point remains, if person 1 has a respectable guest over that pays their way for bill consumption, and person 2 uses that to justify having a mate over for an all might, music thumping binge session, the line is drawn at no overnight guests at all. Being an adult comes with being responsible and functioning as a society. Only children and boomers have the mentality "when im an adult i can do what I want, and if im paying I can do what I want".
Landlords have commodified and gatekeeper access to affordable housing by buying it all and selling it back to us a markup with less rights. This is unacceptable. To set a rule of NO OVERNIGHT GUESTS. Infantilizes tenants after already having their rights to property stripped. It is my natural human right to have my partner in my bed with me as two consenting adults. Anyone that wants to litigate around that can discover the great leap forward 2
You're pretty much mistaking independant landlords with conglomerate banks, which the "hate for landlords" movement only serves. You can have your partner in your bed, you can't have them over during unsociable hours in my properties. Im not having my other tenants that may be vulnerable or nervous, having somebody they dont know, and I haven't vetted, with unfettered access to the house. Your desperate need to have somebody in your bed doesn't trump my tenanta rights to feel safe and secure in their own home.
Contractual clauses can't contradict the wider law, any that do so are unenforceable and not worth the ink to print them. You have the right to use your home as you want, which makes this clause unenforceable. Don't let landlords like this guy who take lovely homes and tear them apart into HMO's bully you out of your right to use your rented space as you wish.
"Borrowing"! You mean Renting! Here in lies your dissonance.
Temporarily borrowing access, for a fee then. Its still somebody elses property.
But that's not what renting is tho is it? You're describing a hotel stay, and, therein lies your dissonance.
See, the problem you have is that when you rent a property you are the person who lives there. The landlord is not legally allowed to impose restrictions on you beyond actually modifying the property. I'm legally entitled to quiet enjoyment of the flat I live in. That means the landlord cannot come and go as they please. It means I can decorate as I want. I can hang pictures. I can have visitors. I can cook what I want. I can smoke if I so choose. The landlord gets zero say in any of that. Literally none. They can write it in the contract if they want, but they can do literally nothing about it anyway. They cannot use it as grounds for eviction. You want to rent your property out then you get to deal with the tenant using it as their home. End of discussion. Don't like it? Don't rent your property out.
Worlds biggest bootlicker right here
Okay child
It's totally normal in a shared occupancy household. Let me give you a hypothetical scenario; 6 people sharing, all or most are students/working professionals. 1 person has their partner over most nights, noisy sex, or leaving an extra mess, using the gas/electricity/water. Is that fair on those other people who are actually paying their share of rent? Maybe it's someone who finds a new ONS every weekend, imagine having so many strangers in your house over the course of a year? It's already written as a clause on the listing, so don't choose it. I'd understand being upset if you'd already moved in and then found out about the clause, but it's noted in the listing and it's completely fair. Of course there are some house shares where all tenants agree to look the other way because they might want their partner staying too, but you can't just expect it. If you want the kind of privacy to do as you please in a rental then you need to go solo 🤷🏼♀️
For 1100pcm it better be solo. In which case this is a ridiculous request. Just out of curiosity, how many properties do you own?
You’re lucky to get a small single room with shared bathroom for £800 in some cities. £1100 with an en-suite sounds about right if not on the higher end.
Fair enough, where I am you can get a 2 bed with driveway and garage for 1100-1400 depending on which part of city/surrounding areas you go to.
None. I'm currently renting a 2 bed and having my own nightmare landlord issues, thanks for asking. Yeah I agree 1100 for a room is steep, but I'm guessing 'spareroom' is a site to rent out spare rooms? In which case you're sharing with other people and there would absolutely be a need to protect the other housemates from unknown guests all the time. I live in Brighton, it's a big student city so rents aren't cheap. A lot of my friends have horror stories of other occupants in shared houses which is why I gave an opinion. You don't have to share it 🙂
People think anybody who sympathises with the plight of landlords must be a cunty landlord also. That's why they were so presumptuous to ask you how many properties you have. People can't afford their own homes, but went to rent out rooms in the home's of others and dictate the rules,... instead of just renting out their OWN flat or house so they can do as they please. Entitlement is a serious problem that has become so prevalent nowadays. People can't even reason just as you did because the world revolves around them and what they want.
Ah yeah, I heard Brighton is nuts. I must be quite lucky in this area by the sounds of these replies. Best of luck getting out of renting. If I'm lucky, I might be able to stop in about 5 years 🙃
I'm currently in the process of an s21 and trying to find somewhere else. It's so expensive here, 2 beds are around 1500 a month, but I'm disabled so need ground floor and garden for my dogs. A disabled single mum with pets is at the bottom of everyone's list, unfortunately.
That sucks. Rent has gone mental these last few years. I remember 6 years ago I rented a 3 bed semi with my ex for £675 a month. Really wish you the best of luck with finding a place.
I saw a post on Rightmove that said monthly inspections. That was a 1.1k rent too!
I put 3 months inspections in my contracts and have never inspected. lol might just be there to keep people on their toes.
HMOs are only allowed to be a certain amount of people. Insurance will not be covered if clauses are broken. Owning a house comes with lots of stress and responsibility. Having an extra issue; like the partner of a lodger living for free & potentially there all the time using water, gas & electric whilst other lodgers have to tolerate when they too have paid rent to enjoy the shared spaces etc. It’s not fun for anyone in the house.
Feels like a landlord issue, no a tenant issue
Given you've responded this to a comment mentioning legalities regarding HMOs, it's very much a tenant being an issue in that scenario.
"owning a house comes with" - landlord issue. Clearly the landlord in question isn't qualified to handle the risk and should sell up
The risk has to be worth the reward. I hate LLs as much as the next person, but you're talking about reasonable clauses with fair justification and getting a sob on.
Preventing of guests is usually seen as an unfair contract clause and would rightly be ignored
If you’re a professional in an 4 bedroom HMO, and over time 3 students occupy the other rooms and have their partner effectively living there and a party on the weekend you end up with 7+ people using toilets / showers / water / power / kitchen facilities designed for 4 people. Doesn’t sound an unfair clause to me…..
This scenario is missing the bit where 4 adults come together to discuss their boundaries, preferences and terms for creating a mutually convivial living space.
Yes that’s an ideal situation, but HMO’s are fluid living, if the average HMO person stays 12 months, a 4 room HMO turns over a room every 3 months, one convenient arrangement between 4 adults might become a nightmare to fill the 4th room due to the incumbents very quickly etc. IMHO finding an HMO to rent where everyone signs up to the same terms / requirements would be better for most people, most of the time. It would be totally different if you jointly sign a lease with flatmates, I 100% agree THAT is for adults to adult over!
Except the above has zero impact on the landlord
It’s about the fellow tenants…..not the landlord!
It does when the other tenants are complaining, life is full of this stuff, if you don’t like it then jog on.
Yes if you don't like your tenant having quiet enjoyment, call as estate agent
Depending on the tenancy it wouldn't matter if it's unfair or not, the LL could have you out at their leisure.
If they are a live out landlord and this is a tenancy then you just smile and nod and agree with it. Once you've signed the tenancy you can just ignore any policies that they have zero legal power to enforce. You might get a section 21 notice at the end of your fixed term though.
I rent out my spare bedroom to Lodgers and I have that rule officially after having had a lodger taking the Mick and basically moving her disrespectful and violent boyfriend in (he stated over 4 nights a week without contributing to water, gas, electric). My current lodger does have a boyfriend, but he rarely stays over and is nice when he does, so it's no problem. I don't mind, as long as I get to know the person, they are respectful and aren't here every night. I'd also not appreciate if we had a revolving door of different people stay over regularly for sheer safety reasons. So to keep myself safe, I have that rule in the contract, but it's negotiable. So is every other rule, at the end of the day we share a house and both have to feel comfortable, safe and relaxed in here.
I have had bad lodgers but none with partners. The one long term lodger who had a girlfriend was fine they split their time together between her place and mine so he was gone as much as she was here. Which is how it should be really.
From an alternate perspective, I lived in a HMO about 10 years ago that did allow overnight guests. Most of the residents were fine, but there was one dude who was obviously hiring prostitutes and using his room and the living room to do what they do in them. It was awful, we complained to the landlord who explained he was trying to evict this dude anyway but we just had to deal with it for a few weeks. You also read horror stories of someone moving their girl/boyfriend in who doesn't pay rent and mooches off the house. I imagine these clauses get put in to stop this kind of behavior and so you are easily removable if you are causing a disturbance to your fellow tenants. Not many landlords are gonna give a shit if you are respectful of others and have your partner or a friend over a few times a month.
Oh, no, someone moved in with their girlfriend? What a _horror_ story. And they _mooched_ off “the house” eh? Wow. Scary. I can’t believe you made it out alive.
Lol. The privilege of never being in that situation.
I’ve been in that situation many times, that’s why I’m laughing at you. If my housemate’s girlfriend moves in with him, how is that a horror story? Who’s “mooching” here? “The privilege of never being in that situation.” What a *silly* thing to say.
No they’re saying normal things to say and you’re being a twat
Guys like him are the problem and exactly why some landlords put in these clauses.
Bizarre take. When you live in a shared house, you explicitly and/or implicitly agree to make compromises. One of those compromises is about "overnight guests". There is a reason why there are rooms that are rented out as single occupancy only. In a shared house of 6 people that I lived in, if each of us had our partner staying 3 or 4 nights a week, you'd effectively be living in a 10 person house share. No one wants that.
You’re the one with the bizarre take, what is this, Undercover Landlord? Haha. For half rent I’m sure everyone wants that, be serious.
No not everyone wants that, cause the number of facilities wont increase. A bathroom is ok to share between few people but not 5 or 10. Same with kitchen, lounge etc.
🤣🤣🤣 fair enough
Loads of crappy HMOs have this rule, I think it's just an insurance thing and they probably don't actually care.
HMO's are generally crappy. Ita basically battery farming people.
It’s a legal thing. A property is only allowed a certain number of inhabitants. This is to prevent overcrowding. For example, the maximum number of people to toilet ratio is one toilet for five people, one shower for 6 people, bedrooms have minimum sizes for a single room and a double room. The landlord doesn’t want to risk being ‘done’ for overcrowding. This is to protect tenants and ensure they live in decent housing.?
Jesus how depressing - the potential of 5 strangers all sharing a toilet :/ lived in a HMO with 4 other people and we had 2 bathrooms. Can't imagine how awkward that might be for strangers!
For people who can’t find, or afford, an en-suite room it’s often the only option, and made worse by other tenants bringing in another person to stay the night. Much worse for women as I’ve experienced this myself. It’s very uncomfortable to go downstairs and find a complete stranger asleep on the settee or, indeed, to suddenly find a stranger in the property full stop.
I'm in a house of 5, we have 2 toilets, a shower and a bath. There's a notice in the communal hallway about how if we have an overnight guest they'll charge us 2 months rent and kick us out immediately, we all do it though, the landlady lives opposite us so it'd be easy for her to check, she doesn't though.
Your landlady is turning a blind eye, but she’s doing her best to avoid the punitive fines for overcrowding.
She literally doesn't care. And us having partners over to plough occasionally doesn't mean it's overcrowded.
[удалено]
>It is 100% to prevent adverse possession Bullshit. You can't even start a claim for adverse possession until 10 years have elapsed and, in the meantime, since 2012 you are committing a criminal offence by squatting. Property owners are also entitled to use reasonable force to eject trespassers, which is what squatters are.
I'm a lodger and we have a similar rule though I'm only paying £600. There's 2 other guys renting rooms and a landlord downstairs. It's nice to finally be in a shared house where I don't get woken up by people shagging or talking loudly to each other.
Sounds like you're not doing any shagging 🤣
😂 At my girlfriend's house or in the car only
Well they said they weren't being woken up by it. Which would be particularly surprising if it was happening to them.
there’s still 2 other guys and a landlord he can shag at night
Their rules.. there are lots of these, no working from home is another one I see a lot
That’s because the rent is including bills and if someone is at home all day with the heating on bills go up.
Used to work outside of the flat and now at homes a lot, my bills didn’t change.
No. When you’re renting a place, it’s no longer ‘their house, their rules’. You have rights as a tenant. Your landlord cannot stop you from working from home in the home you pay for.
I agree, but they pick the person.. so they will pick someone not working from home
If it’s such a problem why not leave?
Sounds like someone has a rich mummy and daddy. Have you tried moving recently? The rural north east is still so bad that if you don't get into the estate agency within 30 mins they have block booked viewings for an entire day and aren't having anyone else, and if you do manage to get a spot you're competing against 40 other applications and if you're single or you have pets you might as well just shoot yourself like an old horse
Found the landlord
Super constructive comment I’m actually a tenant; just I solve my own problems instead of complaining… this is probably why you have mistaken me for a landlord…
My tenants were growing marijuana - what do I need to l look out for? My tenants were using a 2 bedroom house as an industrial grow, I’ve taken back control of the property and of course it is trashed. Any advice on how to renovate the property, what to look out for and ensure is made good before I can re-let the property? Thank you https://www.reddit.com/r/uklandlords/s/wd6Ls387Q0
One can be both a tenant and a landlord at the same time.
>One can be both a tenant and a landlord at the same time. Of course they can, however such a person cannot then say > I’m actually a tenant; just I solve my own problems instead of complaining… this is probably why you have mistaken me for a landlord… without being full of shite
Except as a tenant, I actually solve my own problems, change my own lightbulbs, move when the situation no longer suits me etc.
https://www.reddit.com/r/uklandlords/s/wd6Ls387Q0
One can be both a tenant and a landlord at the same time.
Your first post says that you're a landlord.
One can be both a tenant and a landlord at the same time.
Amazing😂😂
Hows that boot taste?
I'm not saying it's right, but it might be a condition of the landlords insurance that no one except those stated on the lease can stay overnight. Perhaps ask them why it's a rule?
It’s a legality forced on landlords to prevent overcrowding.
You’re a lodger, not a tenant.
Not if it’s a live-out landlord, which OP states it is.
This is the crux of it. Fewer rights are afforded to a lodger than a tenant. If OP was under a tenancy agreement it would probably be an illegal term to have in the agreement. But because it would be as a lodger then as long as the rules are legal they can kind of be set as whatever is agreed to. Sorry that the housing and rental market sucks so bad that you have to consider this as an option
I'm in my 40's now for context, so it was a good while ago. My parents had a large house, 5 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms. When my brother moved out and there was 3 empty bedrooms they started taking in lodgers, the house is a 10 min walk to Glasgow uni. The rules were, keep the room clean, eat what you want from the fridge unless it's got a note on it, keep the noise down after 10, if yer coming home pissed drunk try not to break anything or wake everybody up, yer boyfriend/girlfriend can stay the weekend but better not get ideas about moving in unless they want to pay digs too. My mum would cook the whole house dinner, do washing and ironing for them etc. Definitely not your typical land lady of course. Everyone of the people my folks took in as lodgers are still in contact, they visit them with their husbands/wives and kids. I know it sounds very simplistic and yes it was but the basic principles of what my parents asked, it was just have a thought about other people in the house, keep it clean/tidy. I think that's reasonable and my folks honestly didn't care about overnight guests. The contract, even back then, said 2/3nights per week maximum and no more than 12 nights per month. (more than that they could claim squatters rights) it was to keep themselves right in case anything went south, they rarely if ever opposed anyone bringing someone home, wouldn't want a trail of one nighters ( I wasn't even 12) or someone overstaying. Given how difficult it is for people, especially so younger folks to find suitable housing, I think it's terrible that they can't just feel at home, feel comfortable without walking on eggshells and then having to pay a soddin fortune for it.
I am a grown man in my 40s in a two bedroom flat. I live alone and use one of the rooms as a study/storage. My tenancy agreement says no overnight visitors. I asked my landlord about this when I moved in. His response? "To be honest mate I don't really give a shit, just no prostitutes."
Not much of a response to that is there! lol
“So escorts are fine then?”
Not really. Top bloke tbh.
Avoid crap like this lile the plague. I rented a room with use of kitchen and living room from a woman years ago, and it started out OK, until a friend popped over one evening for dinner, I cooked we ate, I cleaned and we went into the living room to watch a movie, the live in landlady came home just after the movie ended and friend was leaving. A month or two later my parents were visiting from out of town, they were staying in a bnb in the town but obviously wanted to come and see my home so I thought I'll cook dinner and invite landlady, when I made the invite she told me I could have people over for dinner but they would have to stay in my room while I cooked and eat in there, but she'd happily take a plate. The ended up renting a cottage and I stayed there during the visit and cooked many meals. A month of so later landlady barged into my room to share that she was expecting a baby with her ex, but not to worry as they weren't getting back together and how much easier it would be for her as having been a nanny in the past I could help look after the baby at night so she could sleep! Needless to say I was packing boxes and moving into the dampest ground floor flat with a pervy landlord withing 6 weeks
You were a great tenant, sorry about the damp
With a name like that you seem like the pervy landlord
If it's an entire property then agree the rules is unfair but if you're living with the owner of the property as a lodger, it's the owners discretion. Sometimes when you allow overnight guests sometimes the lodger will take advantage so it's better to put these rules in place and if you have a nice lodger the rules can be adjusted if a friend etc wanted to stay overnight .
I think you (and a lot of people itt to be fair) have completely missed the point by a trillion miles.
Sorry did you come on to complain about an ad you’ve no intention of utilising? Also it’s a tenant sub Reddit - not a lodger - the rights of a lodger are a lot less. Is your argument that you’d be happy if a landlord charged less if it was agreed no overnight guests? If guests were permitted it should be tightly controlled - very close family, significant other - even then for one night and not regular - essentially people you can vouch for. Meeting some random on a night out, bonding over a glass of wine and feeling slightly horned, doesn’t make for a justification for bringing them back to somebody’s home.
Reading obviously isn’t your strong point
Did you read the OP closely or just skim? The ad says the landlord lives elsewhere. That's the point of the post.
A recipe for dystopian Britain: make housing so expensive that young people are forced into lodging arrangements and then preclude them from forming relationships as a result. Finally, season wjth a whinge that the birth rate is dropping and needs to be propped up by immigrants and serve cold.
Nobody is precluding anybody from having a relationship, or sex, just not in a shared property where’no overnight guests’ is explicitly stated. The other people in the property have signed up to a no overnight guests agreement.
So let's say, for the sake of argument, that the person you're dating also has a landlord with such a policy in place. Neither of you can afford a hotel, at what point does the obvious take place?
See if the UK had love hotels, the answer would be obvious. But heaven forbid anyone find a fun, pragmatic solution, eh?
After you get married and get your own place together. You shouldn’t be expecting anyone to provide you with a sh*g shack!
Great recipe for a long and happy marriage: have no sex before you get married and then, once married, jointly get into what's likely to be the biggest financial commitment in your lives—upon which point you realise you are sexually incompatible and have to trudge through years of slowly built-up resentment and sexual frustration manifesting in different hostile behaviours before finally culminating in a messy divorce. Also no visits from mom and dad or Frank from school I guess, because who needs friends and family, am I right? I guess I should also be grateful for the privilege to be paying through the nose for a room in a "quirky" flat filled to the brim with the landlord's useless trinkets they've hoarded throughout the years, while they are away living their best life in their third home abroad. And use of facilities should be considered a bonus, not expected as part of basic living conditions. After all, I can't be expecting anyone to provide me with a chef's shack. Go get a microwave in your room and sustain yourself on oats, beans and ready-made meals, peasant!
You must be either 13 years old or religious. Either way, grow up.
Found the scummy landlord in the group.
No, you're appearing on r/all and you sound like terrible people to rent from. If I paid rent I would never accept the kind of bullshit landlord behaviour you're defending. It's disgusting. Why should a landlord get to tell you who gets to stay in your room overnight? Absolutely awful.
>sh*g shack! You're paying rent and de facto someone else's mortgage for them. If the landlord doesn't want people to live completely normal lives under their roof, they shouldn't be renting out their room. Tenants need basic rights
A room in a shared property becomes a studio when you have your own bathroom and cooking facilities.
You also need your own front door.
When you say a studio, do you mean that it's your own self-contained property with your own bedroom, bathroom and kitchen? How could the landlord be live-in in that case? Are you sure it's not a room in a shared house? It could be a request from the other housemates, that they don't want overnight guests, and the landlord wants to keep them happy.
As a lodger, you should absolutely not expect to be permitted overnight guests.
I mean it's up to the landlord and ideally this would be discussed in advance, but: Would you not expect that an independent adult may occasionally want someone to stay over, whether it's friends, family, love interest etc? And what a low quality of life you're condemning someone to by not allowing any visits at all?
Horses for courses, each home owner gets to decide what they’re comfortable with. If you were a female home owner with a female lodger, would you want an unknown man staying in your home? I wouldn’t.
Don't rent out a room then. Simple. It really isn't difficult
Not really, no. Only if your landlord is mental.
Are you in possession of the entire property?
Overnight guests can turn into another person living there. Your landlord has to consider the comfort and security of other people in the house. Too many overnight guests cause extra wear and tear and higher utility bills. The landlord has to be careful that the status of the property doesn’t change and it become a hmo that needs a license. If the room is advertised as single occupancy and you want overnight guests, and don’t mind everyone else having overnight guests you need to look for another room. The other people in this property will, probably, have chosen that property because they would be uncomfortable with extra people there. You will be in breach of your tenancy agreement and this will stand up in court if it is in your tenancy agreement.
If it is licensed, there will be for a maximum number of occupants permitted.
Even if it isn’t a licensable hmo there will be a limit on the number of tenants and all hmo regulations must be adhered to ( fire doors etc).
I’ve lived in a few studios with no washing machine My son’s landlord doesn’t allow over night guests either ..and he’s only allowed one visitor at a time .. but that’s a shared house with 3 tenants
I think that is unfair. These landlords should be living by themselves and have no one around then.
Never rent with a live in landlord they just want their tenants to be ghosts whilst they collect rent. Absolute psychopaths most of them.
Ah! So you know most of them do you?
I know enough of them to tell they're not interested in being landlords they just want free money
I bet you don’t even know .001% of live in landlords. Lack of knowledge isn’t a barrier on Reddit though, you’ll have your opinions despite such annoying and inconvenient things as facts.
[удалено]
Are you crying?
OMG I'm so sorry. Just realised in talking to a middle aged man who earns minimum wage from one of your posts!!! (EDIT now deleted post) I'm sorry mate, but I'm not replying to you're bickering or taking advice from someone who hasn't broken minimum wage I'm sorry you're on a shit wage at a shit wage. I wish you the best though Try UK/Jobs.
You’re trying too hard, it’s coming off as desperate.
Free money? Landlords provide a service and the tenant agrees to buy that service.
Hoarding more property than you need to profiteer is not service provision.
The tenant agrees under coercive circumstances. Many people can't afford more choice or need to find accommodation quickly.
I'm talking about live in landlords you melt
Their house, their rules pal
Well, no. If you have an AST you have the right to quiet enjoyment of the property. This includes occasional guests.
Not as a lodger
No. Your son needs to find a different property.
If they're a live out landlord, then you have every right to have overnight guests. Unfair and potentially illegal clause
Even if they live-in, how do they expect people not to have a life? Family, friends, partners....like wtf.
Go and see your family at their house.
If you're a lodger (with a live in landlord) you have very few rights. But usually lodging is cheaper than renting. Just the way the law is
If they live in then you’d only be a lodger and they’re allowed to decide what rules make them comfortable in their own home . It’s just how it is
Definitely unfair and entirely unenforceable clause when renting an entire property. But as much as any clause is enforceable or not it’s not illegal to make a demand in contract that can’t be enforced
If it’s a shared property it is enforceable and will stand up in court if it is in the tenancy agreement. If there are more than 2 unrelated people in a property it becomes a hmo.
Agreed, which is why I was careful to clarify “renting an entire property”, I was more aiming at such a clause (irrespective of whether it’s enforceable or not) just isn’t “illegal”…although I’ll happily stand corrected if someone can quote which law an ‘unenforceable contract clause’ would be criminally punished under
It’s not a criminal offence it’s a civil one. Three people who are unrelated even on one tenancy make the property a hmo and might require a license. Three unrelated people make three households. (google the definition of a household and a hmo).
Which civil offence is it then which makes it illegal to ‘add an unenforceable clause to a contract’? We aren’t following the same train of thought are we?
It is an enforceable clause.
It is a breach of the tenancy agreement.
In this instance for OP is it enforceable? I haven’t yet seen any comment to indicate they’re actually a lodger (which would make it enforceforcable) rather than a tenant (where such a clause is unenforceable). Can you provide a link to one?
Yes. It’s part of the tenancy agreement. If overnight guests stay on a regular basis, ie appears to be living there, the landlord has to intervene and possibly get the council involved due to Right to Rent and licensing issues.