Family Homes

[Mummy2oneangel]

I wanted to ask opinions on a family matter please. Do you think when family stay in another family members home that they should pay rent or just for the utilities they use?
If the house they are staying in is being sold and they did pay rent for many months, should they get their rent paid refunded on completion of the house sale?

It depends…..are they staying as a guest or are they living in the house?
Also, how long are they/ have they stayed?

It depends on how long for, why, how many people etc. And if staying in an empty house or with family, beyond a couple of weeks some contribution should be offered/made.

I wouldn’t expect something back if a house then sold, I don’t understand that part of the question.

Staying in the house alone for a year plus.

In regards to a return on rent paid; they have paid rent monthly whilst living there which went to paying the mortgage. Now the house is sold should they get the complete rent paid back. Totalling £7650

Why would they get the rent back? What sort of foolishness is that?

If rent was agreed at the start of the arrangement, I can't see that the relationship to the owner or subsequent sale changes that. So no, I wouldn't expect a refund.

No they shouldn’t get the rent back, if it was a landlord selling up they wouldn’t get their money back!

No, unless there is some huge and complex drip feed coming, the tenant is not entitled to a refund

Rent is for the time spent at a property, why would they get it back ?

Some family members are saying that if the house didn't have a mortgage then family could stay there rent free; that is how you treat family, perks of being family. If they pay rent and don't get it back then you are treating them like a stranger. My argument is that it had a mortgage and if the family member wasn't staying there a stranger would have been and would have paid rent that would not be returned.

Were they staying there to help out the home owner? (Eg to avoid risks of an empty house). Or to help the ‘renter’?

Personally I’ve done any dealings with family on a win-win basis, so in this situation it would have been below market rent if there was a benefit to the home-owner (eg reliable tenants up until sale date, no agents fees, and tenants fix problems with the house). But that’s my view, and it’s also perfectly reasonable to charge no rent or full rent.

By the way, when renting to family it can be a bit of a minefield re buildings insurance/ legal tenancy agreement/ legal landlord obligations.

Of course you don't pay the rent back upon the sale unless that was a (ridiculous) pre agreement

Thanks for your input everyone, I will tell them the public has spoken; no rent back. The home owner is vulnerable and wouldn't have understood such a pre agreement. To be nice as they are they would have agreed.