Raising rent because of Flatmate

Forums › Off topic › Raising rent because of Flatmate

1 | 2 | 3

Regs

4066 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Snowflake

#632773 30-May-2012 17:52

keewee01: If they are putting it up due to the extra person and the wear and tear they will generate, get that in writing.

I suspect you would then have a very, very good case against them for the fact that you are paying 3 bedroom rental rate (which was the rate advertised when you took out the lease) and yet there has been only 2 of you. Therefore, due to the less wear and tear that has been incurred on the property it should have been leased to you originally at a lesser rate and your want a refund!!

They couldn't possibly argue with you on that as it is the same argument they are now using to increase your rental.

Of course, if they are only increasing it by a minor amount, then it isn't worth it. But if they are increasing it by $50 a week or something, then they should be refunding you that amount also for the time you've been there already!!

it doesnt really matter much what was being paid before, and what they ask now. if you add a tenant, where the current lease limits you to two, the the landlord can simply say "no", or offer to renegotiate the lease or lease agreement to add the third person. if you get to renegotiate the lease then any prior rents or rent rises are no longer applicable as you're basically starting afresh.

if the lease states "maximum of 3 occupants", then you can probably just add the extra tenant without concern - unless there is some clause that lets the landlord vet -all- tenants before allowing them.

Sales Engineer
Snowflake
www.snowflake.com

about.me/nzregs
Twitter: @nzregs

keewee01

1737 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#632774 30-May-2012 17:58

Regs:
keewee01: If they are putting it up due to the extra person and the wear and tear they will generate, get that in writing.

I suspect you would then have a very, very good case against them for the fact that you are paying 3 bedroom rental rate (which was the rate advertised when you took out the lease) and yet there has been only 2 of you. Therefore, due to the less wear and tear that has been incurred on the property it should have been leased to you originally at a lesser rate and your want a refund!!

They couldn't possibly argue with you on that as it is the same argument they are now using to increase your rental.

Of course, if they are only increasing it by a minor amount, then it isn't worth it. But if they are increasing it by $50 a week or something, then they should be refunding you that amount also for the time you've been there already!!

it doesnt really matter much what was being paid before, and what they ask now. if you add a tenant, where the current lease limits you to two, the the landlord can simply say "no", or offer to renegotiate the lease or lease agreement to add the third person. if you get to renegotiate the lease then any prior rents or rent rises are no longer applicable as you're basically starting afresh.

if the lease states "maximum of 3 occupants", then you can probably just add the extra tenant without concern - unless there is some clause that lets the landlord vet -all- tenants before allowing them.

That's the thing though - it has not been confirmed that it was a maximum occupancy of 2! The assumption is that as it was 3 bedroom, it is likely that the maximum occupancy is 3. But could be wrong.

mattwnz

20173 posts

Uber Geek

#632781 30-May-2012 18:08

keewee01:
Regs:
keewee01: If they are putting it up due to the extra person and the wear and tear they will generate, get that in writing.

I suspect you would then have a very, very good case against them for the fact that you are paying 3 bedroom rental rate (which was the rate advertised when you took out the lease) and yet there has been only 2 of you. Therefore, due to the less wear and tear that has been incurred on the property it should have been leased to you originally at a lesser rate and your want a refund!!

They couldn't possibly argue with you on that as it is the same argument they are now using to increase your rental.

Of course, if they are only increasing it by a minor amount, then it isn't worth it. But if they are increasing it by $50 a week or something, then they should be refunding you that amount also for the time you've been there already!!

it doesnt really matter much what was being paid before, and what they ask now.? if you add a tenant, where the current lease limits you to two, the the landlord can simply say "no", or offer to renegotiate the lease or lease agreement to add the third person.? if you get to renegotiate the lease then any prior rents or rent rises are no longer applicable as you're basically starting afresh.

if the lease states "maximum of 3 occupants", then you can probably just add the extra tenant without concern - unless there is some clause that lets the landlord vet -all- tenants before allowing them.

That's the thing though - it has not been confirmed that it was a maximum occupancy of 2! The assumption is that as it was 3 bedroom, it is likely that the maximum occupancy is 3. But could be wrong.

Isn't it based on the occupancy numbers on the contract rather, than the number of bedrooms? Many people may use the 3rd bedroom for an office, so it can't be assumed that 3 bedrooms will mean at least 3 occupants. Otherwise people may take advatange of the the situation and have say 8 or more people living in a 3 bedroom house. Obviously 8 people will create more wear and tear than just 2 under normal use.

stevenz

2802 posts

Uber Geek

#633097 31-May-2012 09:13

This is one of the reasons I refuse to deal with agencies any more. Greatly reduces my options, but a lot less pissing about. Things tend to get fixed a lot quicker too.

@KnightNZ

Aaroona

3196 posts

Uber Geek

#633101 31-May-2012 09:18

Sorry I've been MIA. Was my birthday yesterday so this was pretty low on the list of priorities!

I checked the contract and it specifically says no more than 2 Adults are included in that contract.

They also came back and said that the rent will only be raised by $10 a week.. Still a $60 a week each saving per week for me AND my girlfriend. So we're pretty stoked.

Thanks for the help guys!

Regs

4066 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Snowflake

#633125 31-May-2012 09:39

keewee01:

That's the thing though - it has not been confirmed that it was a maximum occupancy of 2! The assumption is that as it was 3 bedroom, it is likely that the maximum occupancy is 3. But could be wrong.

normal practice is to write up a lease for the number of occupants that exist at the time the place is rented, not to write up a lease for the potential maximum number. the assumption should be the reverse of what you suggest. If you rent a place and want to keep the option open, check the agreement and get it ammended before you sign it...

Glad things worked out OK for Aaroona anyway :-)

Sales Engineer
Snowflake
www.snowflake.com

about.me/nzregs
Twitter: @nzregs

networkn

Networkn
32359 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#633133 31-May-2012 09:50

I am so glad I don't flat or board any more. Owning property is a PITA but none of this stuff to deal with thank god.

I had some pretty crappy experiences when we rented places.

Never again!

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

rphenix

985 posts

Ultimate Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#633161 31-May-2012 10:03

networkn: I am so glad I don't flat or board any more. Owning property is a PITA but none of this stuff to deal with thank god.

I had some pretty crappy experiences when we rented places.

Never again!

Couldn't agree more with you.

nate

6473 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#633286 31-May-2012 12:04

networkn: I had some pretty crappy experiences when we rented places.

Try being a landlord! I'm spending my long weekend helping my folks clean out tenants who were evicted after they fell three months behind on rent. If it's anything like the last time, it won't be pretty.

(and don't suggest folks need to pick better tenants, these lot have been there 10+ years, big change in personal circumstances and the wheels all fell off)

:)

networkn

Networkn
32359 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#633293 31-May-2012 12:08

Oh I am sure it's bad in both directions, but I would consider myself a model tenant, never missed a rent payment, never left a place in worse condition than I found it. On the flip side, I wanted to be treated fairly, so if you tried it on, I know my rights and would stick to my guns.

stevenz

2802 posts

Uber Geek

#633295 31-May-2012 12:11

It amazes me how poorly people treat places. The last place I moved out of, about the only sign of any wear & tear was a ding in one of the doorframes which I put in when we moved into the place.

Unfortunately I'm pretty much stuck renting and putting up with it due to property prices. :( At least I've had good luck with my landlords over the years having been pretty accomodating to things I've wanted to do.

@KnightNZ

1 | 2 | 3