From: max_demian@bigfoot.com
On 04/09/2025 12:11, Jon Ribbens wrote:
> On 2025-09-04, Davey wrote:
>> On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 10:50:19 +0100
>> Malcolm Loades wrote:
>>> On 03/09/2025 11:40, The Todal wrote:
>>>> I'm a landlord. I rent a small house to a middle aged couple (with
>>>> her kids) who have paid rent regularly. We use an agent, who takes a
>>>> commission but it's useful that the agent arranges periodic
>>>> inspections, ensures we comply with statutory requirements,
>>>> arranges any urgent repairs through reliable contractors.
>>>>
>>>> Now I hear that the relationship between the couple has ended and he
>>>> will be moving out. Our agents advise us that we should insist that
>>>> he remains on the tenancy agreement so that we can enforce any
>>>> arrears against him as well as her.
>>>>
>>>> That seems very unfair, to me. If you break up with your partner
>>>> you should be free to move on and rent somewhere else. I wonder
>>>> whether other landlords would disagree?
>>>>
>>> I'm a landlord and I disagree. You don't say but I assume the
>>> tenancy is a joint tenancy? If I'm correct both incomes will have
>>> been taken into account to check affordability. Does the 'remaining'
>>> partner have the income to support affordability? If so then have a
>>> new tenancy agreement made in just one name. If not then the
>>> 'leaving' partner should remain on the tenancy agreement and accept
>>> joint liability for the payment of rent.
>> Fine, in the ideal world.
>> But if he won't?
>
> What do you mean by "won't"? If a person won't accept liability for
> a debt they owe then generally speaking they get taken to court and
> a judge says they do owe it and then you send bailiffs after them,
> etc.
There isn't a debt here, just potential liability if the rent isn't
paid. Why should he be liable for unpaid rent in a property he doesn't
live in?
--
Max Demian
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
