To think all bills should be split equally?

[Marilynmansonsothereye]

Two adults (friends, nothing else) own a house and live in it. They rent the spare room to their friend.

Friend pays less than market rent for renting the room, It's a small room, the house is a tip from being a work in progress.. Just being fair.

Should all three split bills equally? I think so, but others don't. Arguments against are things like 'I'm always in my room!' 'I was here first!' 'You pay less than anyone else'! etc etc.

Yes woof. I just want something we can all be okay with. I'm not trying to rip the lodger off. We all use the facilities. The other homeowner probably more than me and lodger (he doesn't work and is home all day 99% of the time other than walking the dog!) But I am not petty enough to say he should pay more than me because I am often away for a few days, don't put the tv on etc. The house was in disrepair when we bought it, It's still scruffy ( I mean in terms of bathroom floor needs replacing which I'm getting around to next, there are often workmen coming round, I'm in the kitchen now and some of the wall is due to be redone as it's old, for example ) but is liveable, sitting room with big tv, kitchen perfectly good to use, lodgers room small but nice etc). Unfortunately I've seen a lot of worse houses rented out by the local authority. Lodger as I said above, pays less (half the amount)than what I paid as a lodger for a smaller room in a smaller house, a good few years ago. I do think I'm being fair. I'd like to have that conversation and it to be the last I hear on this annoying and frankly boring subject. .

Bills should be inclusive of rent or split per person, not per size of room, or even per room if for example someone moved a partner in.

As the rent is below market value and bills have been additional up until now, then it should carry on like split per person.

The trouble is that hardly anyone appreciates favours and below market rent, some often even resent it.

When you agree a figure bear in mind if you decided to sell the house he'd have no input and no benefits etc.
He'll never own the house whereas you ams the other homeowner will when the mortgage is paid off.
The lack of security/responsibility needs to be allowed for, which is why he shouldn't pay a 3rd

Lodger's rent should be inclusiveof bills. She does not have the rights over the contracts, cannot change supplier, can be evicted at the drop of a hat etc. It is not the same as having tenancy.

Lodging rents are always significantly lower than having an AST to reflect the lack of rights.

I think you need to do a bit of research then all sit down and say - this is ridiculous that we are all having to argue about bills and ask for bits of money here and there all the time.

There are 3 people in the house and the bills are:
Council Tax
Water Rates
Gas
Electricity
TV Licence
Broadband
(Decide if you all have your own contents cover or if that is a household expense)
(?? shared stuff in terms of cleaning materials / toilet rolls / washing up liquid ?? is you want to ??)
£X is what it costs for the year, so every month is £X /12. So each person needs to contribute £X / 12 / 3.

Have some examples of adverts for similar type rooms for your area to show how cheaply you are offering your lodger their accommodation - either by adding your 'rent' and bills together to compare to the inclusive ones, or just by comparing the rent for the non-inclusive ones.

Then get them to set up a standing order for the total amount or decide if they would rather move somewhere else.

Is it just gas electric water or also council tax.
Gas electric and water should be split equally and ideally included in rent from the start. Otherwise it's administration nightmare of three small additional payments.

Who pays them now? Do you both (owners) pay to supplier or does one pay supplier and other reimburse by standing order/ cash?