Header Ad Module

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

By the room renting... Are they tenants or flatmates.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • By the room renting... Are they tenants or flatmates.

    Hey I'm just about to move into a house which some documents state me as a tenant and others a flatmate. The landlord does not live with us. She is doing the "rent my the room" strategy. With each flatmate renting out a room.

    I know if I'm classified as a flatmate then I'm not protected by the tenancy act.

    I wanted to check if the landlord can simply classify everyone as a flatmate rather than designating a tenant? Or by default are we each tenants?

  • #2
    if the agreement relates to a room then it is a boarding room and you are covered by the RTA. If it is a flatsharing agreement you are not. You are tenants either way

    Comment


    • #3
      If the LL doesn't live there, you are not her flatmate. It doesn't matter a jot if you have other flatmates or not, as long as you are not the LL's flatmate.

      Then the question comes down to whether you have individual tenancies, or are tenants in common. If you are tenants in common, then you are liable for each other's debts, if something goes wrong.
      In a rent-by-the-room, your tenancy agreement will 'tie' you to a specific room, while a joint tenancy does not.
      My blog. From personal experience.
      http://statehousinginnz.wordpress.com/

      Comment


      • #4
        What about flatmates?

        What abour s5(s) of the RTA that excludes non occupying tenants;
        (s) where the tenancy agreement—


        (i) is genuinely entered into to enable a tenant (the sublandlord) to
        sublet the premises to provide accommodation for other people
        for commercial gain
        or to provide accommodation for the sub-
        landlord’s employees or to provide social housing; and (my emphasis)

        (ii) is not entered into to provide accommodation for the sublandlord
        or to evade this Act or any of its provisions; and


        (iii) expressly provides that the sublandlord will not personally occupy
        the premises:

        Comment


        • #5
          But the people occupying would not be the sublandlord's flatmates.
          My blog. From personal experience.
          http://statehousinginnz.wordpress.com/

          Comment


          • #6
            But the people occupying would not be the sublandlord's flatmates.
            why not? flatmates by another name perhaps?
            are flatmates not under......... "the premises to provide accommodation for other people
            for commercial gain"???


            "flatmates" are not mentioned in the RTA so where does their exclusion come from if not here?

            Comment


            • #7
              Flatmates are unrelated people who occupy the same household unit.
              Therefore, if the sublandlord does not occupy the premises (as per your quotation), those who do are his tenants, not flatmates.
              My blog. From personal experience.
              http://statehousinginnz.wordpress.com/

              Comment


              • #8
                My experience on this is you are a tenant as the landlord is not living on the premises. However if the landlord assigns one of the flatmates as head tenant then you could be designated a flatmate to the head tenant. That is the arrangement i had setup for over a decade and it worked very well. You do have protections under the RTA as a tenant but not as a flatmate, this can be both advantageous and disadvantageous. Advantageous in respect that you are accorded all the rights under the RTA but disadvantageous that all the other residents in the building are accorded these rights too. Unfortunately this means should their be an errant tenant that is playing havoc in the house it is much more difficult for the landlord to easily tend to the situation with a prompt eviction .

                Comment


                • #9
                  why does s5(s) specifically allow for a non occupying sublandlord?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by John the builder View Post
                    why does s5(s) specifically allow for a non occupying sublandlord?
                    What exactly is a non-occupying sub landlord? What I've seen setup around Mangere is some houses that are run by agents let out on a room by room basis but generally from what i have observed they are getting the tenants to sign into the RTA. In my opinion the RTA was never really intended to apply to communal shared living situations , it tends to elevate the rights of the individual tenant and erode the collective group rights. But we have people like former MP Sue Bradford trying to meddle the RTA into these shared arrangements because as we all know she is the same ding bat who doesn't think clearly and brought us the much hated anti-smacking legislation which hasn't worked to reduce child violence statistics.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      What exactly is a non-occupying sub landlord?

                      that was what I am asking
                      s5 states;

                      (s) where the tenancy agreement—


                      (i) is genuinely entered into to enable a tenant (the sublandlord) to
                      sublet the premises to provide accommodation for other people for commercial gain or to provide accommodation for the sub- landlord’s employees or to provide social housing; and (my emphasis)

                      (ii) is not entered into to provide accommodation for the sublandlord or to evade this Act or any of its provisions; and


                      (iii) expressly provides that the sublandlord will not personally occupy the premises:

                      so a sublandlord is a tenant not bound by the RTA?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X