Letting My Room Out - Am I Missing Something?

Mad old tory said:
Thanks all, I pay about £700 a month so the guy is getting a discount - pretty tough circumstances for him at the moment so we're basically doing him a bit of a favour.

Hate to feel like the guys are trying to take advantage - they're two of my best mates but I think they feel a bit like it's a bonus for me so they should get more of the share. Seems a tad unfair though. Ordinarily I would probably be the kind of guy who would just split it but this money is really helping me out for when I get back so I think I am well within my rights to take the majority.
Click to expand...


When you say "I pay £700", do you mean the rent payable to the landlord is £700, or your share?

If the rent for the house is £700 and there are three of you on the tenancy, then surely that means you pay £233.33 ish each per month?

In which case if you sub let the room at £350, then the sensible thing would be to deduct that from the £700, leaving £350, or £116.66 ish each left to pay.

It's not about who collects the money and pays the landlord, its about who is named on the tenancy agreement and thus far in the thread it is not at all clear as to the full structure of the agreement and the payments. The language you have used to get your point accross is very slanted towards making the situation seem worse for you, but without really drilling into the facts, in an effort to get the response you want? For example you say you "think we are all named". Surely you must know what is on your own tenancy agreement?

I don't mean that in an aggresive way, more in that as a trainer I pay a lot of interest in words and language that people use in order to satisfy their situation :)

Like I said before, if its your house, you on the tenancy and you sub-let the rooms, then there is no reason why you should allow them any discount at all, but if it is a house share, then I would be raging if I was one of your friends.

All the people saying "your room up to you" - Well only if the tenancy is in the OPs name - If its in all three names, as would appear is the case, then absoloutely NO. You cant just disregard two other people on a tenancy because it suits you - not just the money side of things, but also from actually allowing someone else use of the property!
 
BDEE said:
When you say "I pay £700", do you mean the rent payable to the landlord is £700, or your share?

If the rent for the house is £700 and there are three of you on the tenancy, then surely that means you pay £233.33 ish each per month?

In which case if you sub let the room at £350, then the sensible thing would be to deduct that from the £700, leaving £350, or £116.66 ish each left to pay.

It's not about who collects the money and pays the landlord, its about who is named on the tenancy agreement and thus far in the thread it is not at all clear as to the full structure of the agreement and the payments. The language you have used to get your point accross is very slanted towards making the situation seem worse for you, but without really drilling into the facts, in an effort to get the response you want? For example you say you "think we are all named". Surely you must know what is on your own tenancy agreement?

I don't mean that in an aggresive way, more in that as a trainer I pay a lot of interest in words and language that people use in order to satisfy their situation :)

Like I said before, if its your house, you on the tenancy and you sub-let the rooms, then there is no reason why you should allow them any discount at all, but if it is a house share, then I would be raging if I was one of your friends.

All the people saying "your room up to you" - Well only if the tenancy is in the OPs name - If its in all three names, as would appear is the case, then absoloutely NO. You cant just disregard two other people on a tenancy because it suits you - not just the money side of things, but also from actually allowing someone else use of the property!
Click to expand...

I take it as his share is £700, the friends friend gets it for £500 hence a £200 discount.

Look at it this way OP. You keeping £350 means you are paying £350 per month for a room that if you turned up tomorrow needing to use you couldn't.

Your mates are not put out with the other guy being there and it is not your fault that your employer is paying for your accommodation. They are actually taking the **** by asking for more than you are kindly giving them.
 
But why would someone pay £700 rent of a £1700 a month agreement, which is what it would be in that scenario? This is what I am failing to understand - For starters £1700 a month would be a massive place for three lads to be sharing surely? Unless its like a ultra-modern place in the middle of London?

Hence why clarification needed.
 
BDEE said:
But why would someone pay £700 rent of a £1700 a month agreement, which is what it would be in that scenario? This is what I am failing to understand - For starters £1700 a month would be a massive place for three lads to be sharing surely? Unless its like a ultra-modern place in the middle of London?

Hence why clarification needed.
Click to expand...

Where are you getting £1,700 from? Mad old tory has just told us that the full rent for his room is £700 and that he's allowing a mutual friend of him and his flatmates to stay there for £500. He pays the landlord £700 per month and of the £500 from the mutual friend he is giving £75 each to his remaining flatmates so he's still actually paying £350 per month for a room that he's not living in - a damn sight better than the £700 it would be but still a chunk of money. It also reads that he is the one that deals with the landlord so the others pay their money via him to the landlord but if it were £700 for the whole lot I'd be deeply surprised if it were anything but a hovel and even then it's a pretty cheap hovel in London to accomodate three people.

Sadly £700 doesn't guarantee you the lap of luxury in London, it should be a reasonable place but it's not exceptional by any means to pay that for a single person sharing.
 
semi-pro waster said:
Where are you getting £1,700 from? Mad old tory has just told us that the full rent for his room is £700 and that he's allowing a mutual friend of him and his flatmates to stay there for £500. He pays the landlord £700 per month and of the £500 from the mutual friend he is giving £75 each to his remaining flatmates so he's still actually paying £350 per month for a room that he's not living in - a damn sight better than the £700 it would be but still a chunk of money. It also reads that he is the one that deals with the landlord so the others pay their money via him to the landlord but if it were £700 for the whole lot I'd be deeply surprised if it were anything but a hovel and even then it's a pretty cheap hovel in London to accomodate three people.

Sadly £700 doesn't guarantee you the lap of luxury in London, it should be a reasonable place but it's not exceptional by any means to pay that for a single person sharing.
Click to expand...

The £1700 was based on the assumption that SpeedFreak made - It is totally unclear from any of the posts what the actual rent on the house is. I only used that assumption as a way of demonstrating why total clarification is needed on the rental agreement.

He isnt renting "a room" if there are three people on the tenancy - three people are jointly renting a house - Which is a massive difference. There is nothing which confirms either way what the rent actually is - It doesnt matter if he is the person which makes the payment to the landlord if the tenancy is in three names - Thats just a way that shared houses make it easier for paying the bills.

London again was just used as an example to fit in with SpeedFreaks assumption - But say the rent was £700 between the three then why should the other two not benefit from the person coming in paying £350!?
 
Mad old tory said:
I have free accommodation here, so although I am paying full rent back home, this is effectively a bonus for me
Click to expand...
Stop thinking like that!
It's not a BONUS... you are working away from home and they are providing accommodation for the duration. That's not a bonus, that's a minimum requirement, tbh!

Mad old tory said:
Trust me these guys are good mates, just one can be a bit funny about money and the other is probably unsure on which "side" to take. Never mix money and friends eh...
Click to expand...
Again, I really don't think they are "good mates" if this is the grief they are giving you over your "bonus". It really is none of their business.

I've just re-read the OP and noticed that the person staying in YOUR room is "my flatmates friend"!!! So you're actually doing them a favour! If it's their friend, I would personally start asking them to make up the missing rent - the temp is paying £500, your rent is £700, you should be asking THEM for the missing £200, not handing out freebies!

They are taking you for a ride and are not your friends!
 
Some years ago, I was in a similar position to you. I asked the landlord if I could sub-let and he said I couldn't and would have to move my stuff out. He eventually agreed when I took up references on the person who wanted the room.

While I was working overseas, my housemates emailed me to say that the guy untidy, dirty and wasn't looking after my stuff. Long story short, I decided not to extend my contract and returned home. The guy who was renting my room refused to leave and had to be "persuaded" by the other guys in the house.

My room was trashed and filthy; stuff was broken and I learned a bitter lesson. The other guys in the house didn't try to screw me and are still very good friends although we have all subsequently moved elsewhere.

Never again, EVER!


Sorry, this probably isn't very reassuring - sorry :(
 
As an aside, technically, any amounts you receive from subletting your room would be classified as income and so taxable. I have a nagging memory about the Rent a Room Scheme which allowed the receipt of a certain amount of rental income tax free but I suspect that would not be applicable where you move out.
 
He might be OK but it is horribly vague. Although that is not unusual for HMRC. Either way, he would not to apply to the scheme to avoid the tax liability.
 
So assuming that each of the three people on the tenancy agreement pay £700, what your mates are asking is that their friend pays you £500, you give them £125 each.

If you do a quick bit of maths, that works out as they each effectively pay £575 and you pay £450, while their friend pays £500 for this house. But you don't live there at the moment, and you can't even pop back and stay there in your own bed for a night......

The fact that you don't have to pay for a room where you're working is neither here nor there. Their friend is using your room and you can't use it if you want to, and because he is a bit short of cash, you're subsidising him living in your room!!! And giving them money!!! And they want more!!!

In my opinion, regardless of the legal situation, they are taking the **** between them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom