Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Asked to move from relatives house

563 replies

OrangeBlankets · 14/01/2023 09:32

I've been living in a relatives house for more than 2 years. When I moved in the relative was in a care home but the person who had POA for them agreed for me to move in and said it was ok for a short time and that I didn't have to pay rent.

Now the house owner died and so did the POA. The executors want me to move out.

I don't have anywhere to go, can they evict me?

OP posts:
TirisfalPumpkin · 15/01/2023 12:19

From earlier in the thread it looked like OP had a tenancy agreement on paper but legally wouldn’t be considered a tenant as no rent is paid (it is the money changing hands that makes it a valid tenancy, whether written down or verbal) - am I right?

so yeah, seems more like a squatter’s rights situation. The ‘squatting’ has been short term (she was essentially a guest until the PoA ended, has been living there informally ever since). I wouldn’t have thought there would be substantial protections. Afaik you have to be living there unnoticed/without anyone trying to evict you for ten years before adverse possession becomes an option.

TrashyPanda · 15/01/2023 12:21

OrangeBlankets · 15/01/2023 11:22

If I get evicted do I have to pay costs for that? I thought the owners would have to pay.

Yes, you will be liable for any costs incurred.

and if they take this to the Office of the Public Guardian, be prepared to pay for their fees in any legal action, because there is no doubt your free occupation of the property was in breach of laws specifically set up to stop financial abuse of vulnerable people.

LimeCheesecake · 15/01/2023 12:22

Oh OP - change can be difficult.

another option, if the dog is an issue with finding somewhere else, can one of your adult dc take in the dog until you can find somewhere that will let you rent with a dog? If you speak to letting agencies and stress it’s an older, house trained dog they might find landlords who are happy to have you and dog.

Backthetruckup · 15/01/2023 12:23

Exactly this, OP wouldn't have a leg to stand on in court.

Florissant · 15/01/2023 12:23

Where did the OP state they had a rental agreement? In the original post they wrote:

"I've been living in a relatives house for more than 2 years. When I moved in the relative was in a care home but the person who had POA for them agreed for me to move in and said it was ok for a short time and that I didn't have to pay rent."

The words "rental agreement" and "tenancy" do not appear anywhere.

The OP's other posts address their dislike of their grandmother, her finances and a potential eviction.

Quite happy to be corrected if I am wrong.

Backthetruckup · 15/01/2023 12:24

That was to @TrashyPanda and @Florissant

JessesMum777888 · 15/01/2023 12:24

Don’t mean this rude but you’ve lived rent free for 2 years … why do you think you should be allowed to stay ??

Florissant · 15/01/2023 12:24

Correction: The OP did state that they signed a tenancy agreement with the POA, but that that agreement is now defunct. Ergo, there is no valid tenancy agreement.

TrashyPanda · 15/01/2023 12:24

Afaik you have to be living there unnoticed/without anyone trying to evict you for ten years before adverse possession becomes an option

and that possession has to be openly, peaceably and without judicial interruption

BadNomad · 15/01/2023 12:32

TrashyPanda · 15/01/2023 12:18

Not in this case.

the person with POA was in breach of their powers, because The no-rent agreement did not benefit the GM.

Show quote history

Or it could be argued that the GM did benefit by having someone present in what would have otherwise been her unoccupied property.

Either way, if she has a contract, then the contract stands until it is officially changed or ended. The new landlords still have to go through official channels to evict her.

TrashyPanda · 15/01/2023 12:41

BadNomad · 15/01/2023 12:32

Or it could be argued that the GM did benefit by having someone present in what would have otherwise been her unoccupied property.

Either way, if she has a contract, then the contract stands until it is officially changed or ended. The new landlords still have to go through official channels to evict her.

Show quote history

Yes, it could be argued - but it probably wouldn’t stand up to any investigation, unless the property was in such a state nobody would rent it. Equally, were any other relatives offered the house at a rental fee? If not, why not?

its hard to argue that giving a house rent free to a relative of the Attorney was not a deliberate deprivation of assets of the very person they were supposed to be acting for.

there is a reason there are laws and governing body set up to protect vulnerable people - and this is a very good example of why these laws exist and need to be enforced.

SomethingOriginal2 · 15/01/2023 12:41

OrangeBlankets · 15/01/2023 11:22

If I get evicted do I have to pay costs for that? I thought the owners would have to pay.

You can't possibly think your relative should have to pay to evict you after having let you live in their house rent free?

The fact you haven't saved a sizeable sum of money from 2 years living rent free really is not their problem. youneed to find a private rental asap

Butitsnotfunnyisititsserious · 15/01/2023 12:43

OrangeBlankets · 15/01/2023 11:22

If I get evicted do I have to pay costs for that? I thought the owners would have to pay.

I hope so. You are coming across as an incredibly selfish and entitled person

LakieLady · 15/01/2023 12:50

You definitely need to get advice from a specialist housing adviser, OP. If there's not a housing advice centre where you live, Shelter should be able to point you in the right direction. This might be a bit complex for CAB.

I'd also suggest that you make an appointment to see the homelessness officer at your local council. If you are vulnerable because of your MH issues, they may have a statutory duty to help you or even house you.

Good luck.

BadNomad · 15/01/2023 12:52

TrashyPanda · 15/01/2023 12:41

Yes, it could be argued - but it probably wouldn’t stand up to any investigation, unless the property was in such a state nobody would rent it. Equally, were any other relatives offered the house at a rental fee? If not, why not?

its hard to argue that giving a house rent free to a relative of the Attorney was not a deliberate deprivation of assets of the very person they were supposed to be acting for.

there is a reason there are laws and governing body set up to protect vulnerable people - and this is a very good example of why these laws exist and need to be enforced.

Show quote history

Oh I agree, it is morally fucked-up. But morals don't matter here. Whatever the POA did, that is not on the OP. She will not have to pay any legal fees relating to the actions of the POA. The OP is just a tenant. She will be treated as such. If there is a tenancy agreement, then the new landlord will officially ask her to leave under Section-something. If there is no tenancy agreement, then she'll be asked to leave under Section-something-else. If she refuses to leave after that, then it will go to court.

Talia99 · 15/01/2023 12:59

Florissant · 15/01/2023 12:24

Correction: The OP did state that they signed a tenancy agreement with the POA, but that that agreement is now defunct. Ergo, there is no valid tenancy agreement.

That’s not correct. If the original agreement was valid (and not in breach of the duties of the POA), it is legally treated as being made by the deceased and remains valid on death. The ‘landlord’ becomes the executors and eventually the beneficiaries. They would have to comply with the terms of a valid lease to evict the OP.

Whether or not the tenancy agreement was valid since there was no rent and it may not have benefited the owner for the OP to live there is another matter. If it saved the owner paying bills and council tax, that may be seen as enough of a benefit.

LakieLady · 15/01/2023 12:59

BMW6 · 14/01/2023 09:47

Come on OP, you've been living rent free for 2 years, you must have saved thousands towards a deposit to buy or at least rent a property.!

You have NO right, morally or legally, to stay in your GM's home. It forms part of her estate and needs to be disposed of according to her will.

The gravy train has reached its final destination. Time to get off.

OP has disclosed that she has MH issues. If her MH problems means she was not well enough to work, she may only have been getting £77 a week, out of which she has been paying the bills for the house.

How much would you be able to save on £77 a week? My basic bills come to more than that.

Backthetruckup · 15/01/2023 13:07

I think this is a classic case of just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

LakieLady · 15/01/2023 13:24

Kennykenkencat · 14/01/2023 11:37

Mil had this type of thing.

Her father died and she was left the house (I don’t think he updated his will as they had been estranged for years when he died)
When she was told about the house she went to see it and found he had moved in his gf and her teenage children.

The children might or might not be relevant but they were allowed to stay and the gf was given use of the house until her death.

MIL has now died and I presume the gf is in residence.

My friend and her siblings are in a very similar position, except the "girlfriend" is now in her mid-80s. Friend's DF specified that his partner would have the right to remain in what had been the family home for the rest of her life or until she moves into a care home.

It's over 20 years since he died and one of friend's brothers reckons she's going to outlive him. Thankfully, they're all very fond of her, so are fairly philosophical about it.

LakieLady · 15/01/2023 13:42

Mynewhome · 14/01/2023 12:44

Most of the people on this thread don't know how the housing /homeless system works. Op does not have a choice if you can't find anywhere to go, has no funding to do so then she has to go through the system.

Quite. People who haven't experienced it themselves or worked in a field where they deal with homelessness are often very quick to tell those less fortunate that should leave their homes when asked to.

Likewise those who expect the OP to have saved up enough money to put up RIA and deposit, when they have no idea if she's been well enough to work.

LakieLady · 15/01/2023 14:02

boilthekettle · 14/01/2023 15:22

How are people thinking that the OP would have been able to save much, realistically, if she was unwell and presumably on benefits?

I have never claimed universal credit but surely they wouldn't have just handed the OP the portion meant for housing (so she could save it) because she had no rent - and the UC she received would have been under a hundred quid a week or so?

Not enough to eat and pay bills and for absolutely everything else.

They certainly wouldn't have been given the money for rent without producing . an enforceable agreement that clearly showed that she is liable for rent.

And renting from relatives, even with an agreement that shows liability, also requires proof that it is a genuine commercial arrangement. I am currently appealing a case where a client has been refused help with rent because they are renting from their parents, who have moved to their second home in Spain.

LakieLady · 15/01/2023 14:12

OrangeBlankets · 15/01/2023 11:22

If I get evicted do I have to pay costs for that? I thought the owners would have to pay.

They can ask the court to order you to pay the costs. Generally, such applications succeed.

freyamay74 · 15/01/2023 14:26

Bottom line is, the house does not belong to the OP, the grandmother's name was on the deeds and she has left her estate to the beneficiaries she chose.

So even if there's a tenancy agreement (and it seems very unclear) there are entirely lawful steps which will be taken to remove the OP. And it's highly likely she'll end up liable for the costs of removing her if she tries to drag things out.

TrashyPanda · 15/01/2023 14:29

BadNomad · 15/01/2023 12:52

Oh I agree, it is morally fucked-up. But morals don't matter here. Whatever the POA did, that is not on the OP. She will not have to pay any legal fees relating to the actions of the POA. The OP is just a tenant. She will be treated as such. If there is a tenancy agreement, then the new landlord will officially ask her to leave under Section-something. If there is no tenancy agreement, then she'll be asked to leave under Section-something-else. If she refuses to leave after that, then it will go to court.

Show quote history

Ignorance of the law is no excuse and never had been
this isn’t about morals - it is about the law

OP knew her relative was acting as POA, ie that they were acting on behalf of a person who could not act on their behalf. The rent free agreement did not benefit anyone but OP and is contrary to the POA, as it goes against the financial safeguarding. Therefore the POA was acting contrary to their powers and any agreement they entered is capable of being overturned. And it is obvious to anyone (including OP) that the agreement did not protect the GM. Should the beneficiaries wish to challenge this, then it is possible that legal costs could be awarded against OP. And it is probable that she would be asked to recompense the estate with 2+ years rent.

the law is perfectly clear. It is in place to prevent financial abuse of vulnerable people.

Daleksatemyshed · 15/01/2023 14:39

It's an unfortunate situation but really the person in the wrong originally was the POA. I've held POA for a relative and when you take it on there's quite strict guidelines which you agree to when you sign up, mainly to keep financial records and to act in the best interests of the relative. I expect they let the Op stay then couldn't find a way to tell them to leave