neighbour on at me to keep my heating on

[clovissa]

We've just rented a house, been in a couple of weeks. We have the main house and the back half of the basement. The front half of the basement is a one-bed flat. The night we moved in the switch tripped and we found out the switches are in the other flat, but there is a key over the connecting door, so we're to knock, then let ourselves in if there's no reply. He's an oldish guy, seems nice.

Now it turns out we share all utilities with him. This was never mentioned before, they apply a ratio.

He has been up twice now because we haven't got the heating on and he's cold. He wants us to put it on and then turn down all our radiators if we don't need them on. It's a bit of a jig as we have four floors and are in all day.

He also said our tumble drier was going to run the bills up and he's very careful. I've told him not to worry, we will make sure his bills don't go up but arch.

Also, someone I know nothing about has a key to enter our house. Isn't that a bit weird ?

I wonder if the house was at some point let as an HMO or lodging house and as the previous Tenants or Lodgers left, the house was reclaimed bit by bit - until there was only one tenant left - in the basement 'flat'.
He is probably an Assured or Regulated tenant - making it nigh on impossible for the landlord/present owner to evict him.
I believe this was Peter Rachman's specialist area!
Surprised the landlord hasn't offered him money to move - maybe he will - as the presence of the tenant will hugely affect the sale value of the property and he doesn't sound as though he's going to pop off anytime soon.
Sounds potentially incredibly inconvenient - for all parties - wouldn't be my cup of tea - reckon you could have the landlord over a barrel in terms of negotiating a cheap rent - if you want to stay.

squeaky it's not worth seeking compensation from an individual who has nothing to pay with. The OP rents her house. If she, for argument's sake, has no car, no savings and nothing of significant value a solicitor would be very loathe to advise their client to proceed with any legal action. And, Whackamole, some people are less hung up on material goods than others. Some might shrug and say so, a flood happens, shit happens, I won't die because my clothes, books, CDs or TV are ruined.

The OP rents her house

From what OP is saying, she is a property owner too... so insurance should be a priority I would have thought.

Maybe for you, clearly not for the OP, Squeaky. :) But, far more worrying and important are the H&S implications of the current arrangement regarding the utilities etc and for that she definitely needs to speak to Planning Control and EH.

Re the insurance saga - we insure what we need to insure for legal reasons, like car, my business etc. We gave up bothering with insuring contents about 15 years ago. Stop nagging the op, I'm sure she's got landlord insurance for the place she lets, having home contents of one's own home is entirely one's own business and nothing to do with her original question.

what an annoying situation, but rofl at 'he could be a perv'

Regardless of the heating/tumble dryer ethics, I would put a couple of sturdy bolts on your side of the connecting door ASAP and keep them locked. The old guy is probably harmless, but if he forgets to lock HIS front door/leaves a window open etc and burglars get in, the current arrangement would give them access to your home...

So he wants you to subsidise his heating but not use your dryer? That's a bit one sided. Seriously, this is wrong on so many counts. On you and the other tenant. Please don't let this dodgy landlord get away with this

A landlord rents a house to a toddler and teen knowing that he has a sitting tenant in the basement - I think the landlord is hoping for a lot of trouble and then the end of the story will be

and the old man in the basement moved out and lived happily ever after

and the landlord then puts the house up for sale - the tenants in the upstairs will have to find a warm cosy house elsewhere to live

Rachmanism by child proxy!

Insurance is gambling - and apart from legal requirment to have insurance some people don't like to gamble, therefore don't insure there income from sickness, their house contents, or their lives or their cycles.

It isn't always a choice as some properties are now not insurable against flooding and therefore you can't pay to gamble even if you want to.

So the OP is a landlord

Is this a reverse AIBU?

She rents out her large house with a tennant in the basement, lovely new family move in and are a bit dubious as to why they have another tennant they didn't know about, shared utilities, fuse boxes off their property, an unfair responsibility to a neighbour they don't know.

You are just wanting to see if people side with YOU the LL or with the tennant which is how you are portraying yourself. Is that why you aren't going to have it out with the LL as you think it is a reasonable way to live?
You know contents would be invalid if someone had unrestricted access to your house. You don't seem to care about fire regulations re the fuse box.

If you genuinely are the tennant then why don't you care about the above things?

Insurance is gambling - and apart from legal requirment to have insurance some people don't like to gamble

Not quite.. it is only a gamble from the insurance companies point of view. They are the ones taking the risk. The policyholder has insurance as protection.

I would be concerned about all the issues raised her but beyond that I'd be worried that this other tenant could drop dead tomorrow and in could come another tenant who might make a lot more problems for you. (or does the LL want to get this guy out and then have no one else there? I can't imagine that if it's been created as a separate flat and would bring in more income).

This nice amicable arrangement that you have now could go seriously tits up with another person who makes your life deeply unpleasant. This guy might be harmless, but presumably you won't have any say in who moves in next.

Not quite.. it is only a gamble from the insurance companies point of view

It is gambling against something happening or not happening, from the insurance side or the consumers side - you gamble on the risk of something happening. The probability of that happening will raise the cost of the gamble

Oh, well spotted that the OP is the LL. I wondered why she was ignoring all the posts about the legality of this situation and just focusing on the fluffy stuff.

No, I don't think this is a reverse AIBU, I'm fairly sure I recall the OP. Her teenager is an orphaned nephew IIRC.

clovissa, i think that you ought to have a conversation with the LL to see if (proper not fan heaters) independent heating can be installed to the other Tenant's property. It may still be off the main supply, but something he can control directly.

I think you are entitled to express a level of dismay that this set up was not explained to you properly prior to you taking the property.

IIRC the OP has a small flat, which owned prior to getting married/having baby and now teen. Flat is too small for all of them.

OP, kindly correct me if I'm mistaken...

Houdini, The dimplex portable electric heaters are brilliant and cost only 100 quid or so. They warm up the room instantly, as they have a fan blower thingy. We use them and much prefer them to central heating, which takes a while to heat the room.

They probably are expensive to run, though. No idea what it would cost in a month vs. central heating for a one bed.