Are these rules for my lodger too harsh?

[southatsea]

I have a lodger but he has complained that my rules are too strict. So looking to canvas opinion on them!

No loud music or loud TV after 10pm
No smoking
Has to ask my permission before having friends to stay
Use of the bathroom, kitchen and living room but can't use the bathroom between 0645 and 0700 (when I need it to get ready for work)
Plates cutlery etc to be brought downstairs on the day they are used eg no hoarding in bedrooms.

Do these sound too harsh? His room is well furnished with a sofa, double bed, tv etc and I charge below market rent.

[aibutonamechange]

@SunShades

[Amethystical]

Just to see her reaction as someone so precious and selfish to 'close' a bathroom to other people would get quite animated I think.

Nah, I'd just tell you to move out.

[Amethystical]

And you wouldn't get a good reference if you asked for one

[Tistheseason17]

Your house, your rules. YANBU.

[Gwenhwyfar]

"Your house, your rules. YANBU."

This is an expression for parents, not live-in landlords. When people are paying rent you have to accept some inconveniences. You can't have your cake and eat it.

[slithytove]

Surely you have to expect some inconvenience as the rent payer as well? Like only having bathroom schedule choice for 99% of the day and accepting that for that other 1%, it’s occupied?

Why would renting one room give someone more rights or accessibility than the owner?

It’s bonkers.

[Gwenhwyfar]

Yes, I agree and I've already said that I don't see a problem with the bathroom timetable, but some on here are acting as if a landlord has 100% right to choose everything and the lodger is nothing. It's very telling that one of them used an expression used by parents.

[slithytove]

But it is your house your rules, how could it not be?

Who else should make the rules?

No smoking, no pets, no loud music - whatever it might be. It’s the homeowners right. The lodger or tenant can refuse and find somewhere better suited.

At least with a set of rules the lodger is making a conscious decision to accept them if they choose to live there. Far worse to not be up front.

[SofiaAmes]

@Gwenhwyfar Of course the homeowner gets to choose everything. It's their home. And the difference between the kids of parents and the lodgers of landlords is that the lodgers don't have to move in and can choose to move out at any time. Why should the landlord "have to accept some inconveniences." If you are careful about who you rent to, not only do you not have to be inconvenienced, but in my case, my life has been enriched by my lodgers and tenants. And I'm sure they would say the same of me, even with my "rules."

[slowsloegin]

But if they tried to impose a 'rule' closing it at certain times, I'd go out of my way to be as uncooperative as possible. Even if that meant occupying the bathroom for several hours.

Right. So you're exactly the kind of arsehole these rules are made for.

Can't keep to them? Find yourself needing to find a new home.

I'm not a stickler for rules btw. But I understand that it's best for what's expected to be very clear.

e.g. I'm not the tidiest person. I have two DC and I have no idea how other people manage to keep their homes looking like show homes. This was a bone of contention with one of our lodgers, and we worked on compromises that worked for all of us (and we're still friends!) but it wasn't how I wanted to live. In the next round of potential lodgers we interviewed, we were very clear that the communal areas would not be like a show home, that there would be a general level of chaos that comes with (our version of) family life, and if this was a problem then this was probably not the place for them.

It's about managing expectations and being clear on what's acceptable and what isn't.

The OP has obviously not started off with this rule, as she's had to impose it because the lodger is thoughtless.

It's perfectly reasonable, but thank you for demonstrating how some people can't see further than the end of their own nose. You must be making life very difficult for yourself and those around you.

[Icanttakemuchmore]

Sunshades... You would be asked to leave if you were my lodger acting like that . There is absolutely nothing wrong with the owner of the house stipulating when they need to occupy the bathroom to enable them to get to work on time . I can't believe that someone would be so uncooperative.

[SchadenfreudePersonified]

Sorry but PMSL.

Only during your designated pee time, I hope . . .

[SchadenfreudePersonified]

If I were the lodger, I think I'd make a deliberate point of using the bathroom at the times the OP says it's closed. Just to see her reaction as someone so precious and selfish to 'close' a bathroom to other people would get quite animated I think.

And I'm sure you would get to enjoy life on the streets Sunshades - because that's where you'd end up if you were my lodger and you tried that shite with me - or with most sentient adults.

[Hidingtonothing]

Well aren't you a delight Sunshades?!! Why do some people seem to take such enormous pleasure in inconveniencing others and what on earth has happened to them to make them so......well, spiteful? I know someone like this, seems to actively look for ways to get in other people's way or make their life just that little bit harder. I pity him tbh, his life must be pretty empty to spend so much time trying to 'get one over' on people

[SunShades]

@SchadenfreudePersonified

You'd be receiving a summons from my legal team for breach of contract in that case.

[GeekyBlinders]

Your legal team. Sure, right.

[SchadenfreudePersonified]

Sunshades

[CrabbityRabbit]

Legal team!!! 😂😂😂 #dead

Thanks for the laugh sunshades!

You would have zero recourse if you got chucked out of your lodging for the dickish behaviour you proposed.

[MaisyPops]

sunshades
You seem to be doing a good job of being provocative on a number of threads at the moment.

[Imchlibob]

@Sunshades clearly doesn't actually understand the meaning of the word "Lodger".

You have a different status as a lodger compared to a house sharer. You are not equals.

[Bibesia]

You'd be receiving a summons from my legal team for breach of contract in that case

The procedure for suing for breach of contract does not include issuing a Summons. And, given the Schadenfreude didn't suggest terminating the contract other than lawfully, it wouldn't be relevant anyway.

[thetaleunfolds]

They all sounds completely reasonable to me. If he can't comply then what kind of human being is he?!

[Gwenhwyfar]

Someone who can afford a legal team is very unlikely to be lodging.

[Lweji]

The plot thickens.
It's really dense at this point.

[MonumentVal]

I'd look forward to the legal team's response. If they don't tell you it first, certainly my response back would be to refer to the reply in the case of Arkell v Pressdram...