Shared rate or not

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • Author
  • #34564

    This question is hypothetical but is causing some discussion in the office.

    Property is HMO, all rooms have seperate agreements. There are 5 beds in the property. They share kitchen/bathrom only.

    For various reasons 4 of the tenants have moved out leaving only 1 still resident. His rent agreement stays the same. LL is looking for 4 new tenants.

    Does the remaining tenant move to 1 bed self-contained rate until new tenants move in?

    It seems to me that he should as he isn’t sharing anything but others in the office ain’t convinced.

    Any opinions?


    The Guidance Manual suggests still shared rate (my boldface)

    This shared rate will be based on properties where the tenant has the exclusive use of only one bedroom and [b:c0860ce9d9]where the tenancy provides [/b:c0860ce9d9]for him to share the use of one or more of HB Reg 13D(2)
    (i)a kitchen
    (ii) a bathroom
    (iii) a toilet, or
    (iv) a room suitable for living in


    It comes down the meaning of the word “exclusive” again.

    Does he for the time being have exclusive use of the kitchen and bathroom … since there is no-one nelse to share it with? Or, because the landlord can move in more tenants at any time and he has no say over that, does he only have exclusive use of his own room?

    When HBINFO asked for Paul Stagg’s view on the use of the term “exclusive” in the context of joint tenants, he did not think that the particular meaning that it has in housing law should be imported into HB: so while joint tenants do, in housing law, have exclusive possession jointly of the whole house, Paul reckoned that for Reg 13D purposes we should be looking at what in practice is reserved for the personal use of the claimant.

    The context is different here, but if you follow Paul’s general approach to “exclusive” you could say that for now the claimant has a K&B for his exclusive personal use even though to a housing lawyer his agreement does not give him that.

    I’d be surprised if you ever have to make a decision like this for real though.

    Kevin D

    “Exclusive” was most recently considered in [b:f3baece197]CH/2728/2008[/b:f3baece197] – some of the principles may be of help.


    [quote:6452cf3fed]I’d be surprised if you ever have to make a decision like this for real though.[/quote:6452cf3fed] I agree, as I said this was just hypothetical 😀

    Thanks to you both.

    Julian Stanbury

    Sorry to piggy back onto this thread, but I am looking at a similar question, in as much as it concern “exclusive use” of rooms.

    3 joint tenants, 2 of whom are a couple, sharing the accommodation with the other joint tenant.

    The tenancy doesn’t grant exclusive use, but they have come to an arrangement between themselves whereby the couple will be the only people with access to 2 rooms (1 of which is a bedroom).

    I’m trying to find CH/2728/2008, but am having no luck finding it, in order to view any advice on “exclusive”.

    I can appreciate the common sense of basing decision on the reality of the situation, but i know we don’t always get the simple approach.

    Any help appreciated.

    Kevin D

    CH/2728/2008 – Information Issue 05/09.

    If you still can’t locate it, feel free to pm your email addy Julian (I’m on a different PC, so don’t have access to your addy).


    there is a 3 bed house that had 3 tenants – all on shared rate

    the landlord gets rid of one tenant – and gives the remaining 2 a living room each – so that in theory they now get the one bed self-cont rate each as they have 2 ‘exclusive rooms each’ (a bedroom and a living room)
    and the landlord gets an extra £60 and a former tenant has to find somewhere else to live

    sound reasonable? was this the plan?


Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.