So fed up with live-in landlords

[EternalLodga]

I live in a city where rent is so high many of my friends and I are forced to be lodgers. There are SO MANY live-in landlords who are so unsuited to this gig.

I actually wonder whether there's a generational factor at play here: maybe they have never had to co-live and be on the back foot, as they basically take hefty rent off you and do whatever the hell they like.

My landlord just announced his daughter is going to spend 3 months in the spare room. Okay?

A friend of mine, on the day they moved into the house, the landlady had a party (the move in day was established weeks in advance).

They make a load off your back while also trying to rope you into doing deep cleans of their house while monopolising the communal areas.

In my experience and much to my surprise, the worst ones have been the most vocally left wing. Ive been trying to put my finger on why that is (im left wing myself) and I think its because they actually feel embarrassed about what they're doing, so their boundaries are completely fucked. Whereas the less "bleeding heart" ones see it as a simple transaction where you uphold your end, they uphold theirs.

One landlady actually told me when I could shower "to save on electricity bills". Honey, I pay you 800 quid a month: ill shower when I like??!

Sorry for the rant but im so sick of totally inappropriate people stepping into this role.

i can't understand why you are having so many problems when you sound such a joy to live with!

I'm confused about what you think would be different if there wasn't a live in landlord and you just lived in a house share, with each person renting a room.

You'd still be expected to clean the communal areas
There usually wouldn't be a spare room lying empty long term.
The other housemates might throw a party and you couldn't stop them.

@latetothefisting I assume if it was a houseshare there would be an interview or discussion with bringing another person in and rent would be reduced?

Do lodgers pay less than a house share?

It is MUCH less expensive than a flat share though - lower rent and no bills!

The two bedroom apartment underneath us is rented out and the landlord charges £1,700 a month plus the tenants obviously have to pay all the bills.

A friend of mine has a large apartment in central London and has two female lodgers. They really seem to keep to themselves, although she seems very laid back. Recently though a new lodger said a friend was coming to stay from abroad for a few days. My friend was fine with this, but said they spent a long time cooking with loud music on and she could hear them having sex one night (not loud but the walls are thin).

She didn’t complain to them though - just to me!

Lol! I thought the same since everyone on mn changes their sheets daily and uses a fresh towel at every bath. I thought mn machines run day and night!

2 full loads. He used the machines every day to just wash a few items like cycling gear. I worded it wrong.

I was coming from the POV that there wouldn't usually BE a spare room in a houseshare (other than perhaps a brief gap between tenancies), every room would be rented out as standard.

Whether in a house share or as a lodger I wouldn't expect to have any access to a spare room (just my bedroom and communal areas) so I don't really see how someone being in there hugely affects OP one way or another.

The advantage of being a lodger is that usually you just pay one payment to cover everything so you don't have to faff around setting lots of things up, everything is in the owner's name and your rent includes your share of the bills. So if bills are higher one month (i.e. a particularly cold winter) your rent shouldn't change. So the landlord's dd moving in shouldn't make any difference to OP financially, albeit I appreciate it would be a bit annoying to have three people in the home, using the bathroom and kitchen etc. when you'd only signed up for two.

I'm not sure why people think live-in landlords are charging less. The arrangement is being touted as a houseshare, despite what its legal status is, and prices reflect that. Not to crap on this person, for example, but they are renting a room as a 'live-in' landlord and the cost is no less than it would be in a houseshare with a few people with a tenancy agreement

https://m.spareroom.co.uk/flatshare/flatshare_detail.pl?flatshare_id=17142680&search_id=1371661824&city_id=&flatshare_type=offered&search_results=%2Fflatshare%2F%3Fsearch_id%3D1371661824%26&

Traditionally it used to be cheaper but in a lot of cities now everything is so expensive that it costs pretty much the same.

I've had some great experiences, and am still friends with two of my former landladies. When they are actually nice people, its a lovely set up, because it feels more like a home than a houseshare, and its often just two of you. In past (positive) setups, we have cooked for each other, shared food, developed a very considerate way of being together. Lent each other stuff, helped each other out. But there are ones where they dont even have to voice it, as a PP said the sense of "You have no rights, LODGER!!!" just comes off them in waves.

To me being a lodger has been useful for the flexibility, as my work has meant I'm usually "posted" to random places. Now though, I'm moving into a more static role, hence buying a place.

No

see this is the difference between being a lodger and renting a shared place - as you have said elsewhere you rent a room - you are not renting the spare room so you don't have any claim over it.

So, do you expect to live in a home but not clean communal areas? YABU.

Presumably rent is a fair rate. Stop whinging.

I used to have a great landlady. She was mad as a box of frogs but we rented rooms in her gorgeous home for cheap rent and she didn't ask too much in return. She tolerated all sorts of 20 something antics. She was unselfish. I treated her badly as a callow youth and feel bad about it now.

I certainly didn't!

Just cleared up after myself so leave the kitchen clean after cooking, do my dishes, bathroom clean etc, not leave a mess in the living room. Landlords Mum cleaned the communal areas. He got all the cleaning materials and loo rolls too.

I don't disagree that being a lodger sucks. I've done it myself in my twenties to get away from an abusive ex. I don't think the landlady really wanted me there but she needed the money to help pay her mortgage.
We both resented each other, because I was fed up of feeling like Anne Frank in my room and I think she felt irritated having a stranger in her flat. It wasn't really a large flat either. I lasted about 4 months there and ended up sharing with a friend. Didn't really like that either, so got a place on my own. I came to realise how valuable having my own space is.
If you're buying your own place OP then at least its cheap while you're saving up so just smile and grit your teeth.

Lodgers shouldn’t be exploited into doing deep cleans of the property though or given unfairly restricted hours to shower in to meet electricity cheap rates.

They still need to be treated with respect.

I don’t think £800 pm for a room is cheap.

It's become very blurred. In fact the last "live in lamdlord" I had, advertised for house sharers but we were definitely not sharers in his eyes. He was a new landlord - what he said went! Of course he didn't expect the 3 very different lodgers to unite (over his unreasonable behaviour) and actually find somewhere to rent together as equals!

Not where I live up North but if she lives in London then relatively it probably is cheap.

I don’t understand the issue with expecting someone to contribute towards cleaning in shared areas, or to contribute to cleaning products, particularly if these are used in the shared areas. I mean, they could hire a cleaner or do these things for you, but they will come with an extra charge to you.

So long as expectations are made clear before you move in, they can do what they like and charge what they like. You are the one accepting the terms - if you don’t like it, then find a different type of living arrangement.

I think some people both live in landlord and lodgers aren’t really suitable to do this

My son and his partner are live in landlords
they only have people who are on short terms so someone who is studying / here for work or buying -they are clear about this in there advert

they prefer to have men as they find women. Pain in the ass 😂

The present lodger moved in last September was suppose to stay a few months as he is buying a place but it’s a new build and the date keeps changing so he is staying on

no issues with him he’s got a lovely large well maintained room in a gorgeous house
plenty of space and it’s well maintained and it’s all inclusive of bills and my son and hi partner are very laid back and easy going

he isn’t expected to clean the house only his own room and cleanup after himself

he’s only got to give 2 weeks notices which suits him fine as when his house is ready he will have to move quickly so he doesn’t want to be tied into a month or longer contract

they use the lodgers money to over pay there mortgage each month

They don’t actually need a lodger as they can manage fine but they have the space and when they were buying I advised them to get a 3 bed so that if they ever needed to rent out the room they could as times can be hard and it’s always good to have that option

Okay?? They also shouldn't be sent to sweep chimneys or clean moss from the roof with no safety equipment either.

I was responding to the comment that said it was 'as if' a lodger has less rights. Which they do. Legally. I'm not sure why you are reading more into it than that.

Lots of council have rules on how many can share a house
so three individuals often can’t rent a house but a couple & 1 friend can rent the same house
it’s due to HMO laws they are different in each area

When three or more unrelated individuals rent a property and share facilities like a kitchen or bathroom, it's often classified as a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO). This classification can trigger specific regulations and licensing requirements for the landlord, and may also mean increased safety standards for the property.

because of this landlords often don’t want to rent to 3 or more individuals only families as they often have to get a licence from the local council and it’s more expensive to run and it’s got much stricter regulations to work with

Live in landlord is a house share where you pay more and use the communal areas. Lodger is very cheap, only a room. London is normally the former. Often with a younger single housemate. The landlord can't have it both ways though

Exactly. There's so much of this out there. It almost feels like they're actively trying to trick you. The "live-in landlord" part tends to be buried, and I can't remember the last time I actually saw anyone use the word "lodger".

I don't think the lodger vs house share line is clear at all, in many cases. It's as if the landlords look around and think "oh, so that's how much people are paying for a room" and decide they'll charge the same. Including extra for bills. They have no concept there should be a difference, and no awareness that their presence in the property will be off-putting to most tenants. You're always going to feel like the 'guest', living with someone who actually owns the property, no matter what you do.

I've been lucky enough to avoid it so far, but it's everywhere, and people are often desperate enough to do it. Renting is broken.