Tenant want to keep 4 people in 2 bed 1 bath apartment

[oh_noes]

Hi,

I just received an email from Tenant asking/questioning/requesting to have additional people stay in the apartment.

Essentially he is the only person on the lease but I know of the other person currently living in the apartment. He has asked if he can have another couple staying permanently in the apartment which will total 4 people in what's literally a small 2 bed 1 bath single level apartment.

The only real questions I have is:

a) As the owners, are we bound to ensure there's no more than N people living in a certain sized property?

b) How do I deal with water? Currently I'm paying for it (and I don't mind) but if the tenant wishes to have more people, surely Water usage will double which I'm paying for with no benefit.

c) Am I within any bounds to say no more than N people in the property?


My initial thought is "I don't really mind" but I thought I'd ask. The last thing I want to find out is my tenant is running some prostitution ring or backpackers rig out of my property.

Thanks

 

[tez]

Extra wear and tear as well. If you dont mind, I'd be increasing the rent to reflect the extra people staying. Im sure your tenant is receiving money from these extra people as well.

 

[Bon]

I suppose it's reasonable for 2 couples to share? If that's the case and you agree to it, it would be a good time to include water costs for the tennant and increase the rent as the above poster mentioned.

 

[oh_noes]

I suppose it's reasonable for 2 couples to share? If that's the case and you agree to it, it would be a good time to include water costs for the tennant and increase the rent as the above poster mentioned.

It's not 2 couples as far as I know. It's 2 singles and 1 extra couple.

But how do you, or what's the best way to approach this? "If you have another couple stay with you you'll need to pay for the water usage"?

I'm really not too fussed about increasing rent. I'd be happy for them to just pay Water.

 

[wobbycarly]

Only those named on the lease are responsible for the lease. So if you have 4 people living there and one named on the lease, you are asking for trouble. If anyone skips out, you can only chase the person on the lease.

Unless you have granted clear permission for them to sublet, and that person has their own leases in place. You'd want to watch that your landlord insurance (if you have it) will continue to cover you. If one of the people there damages the place, and they're not on the lease, the insurer may reject the claim.

Your call, but I'd check these if I was you.

 

[lizzie]

my rules would be "water included" and the other names have to go on the lease.

 

[ACTInvestor]

You probably have a lease stating something like "people in property - N adults", you can certainly decline their application for having two more people in your property. I would recommend that they don't go on the lease though. They would be too hard to kick out and if you impress upon your initial tenant that he would be responsible for all the other residents, he might choose not to have them live there. If you insisted on all residents being put on the lease, you could create a new lease and ask for more rent. I also think 2 bdr is too small for 4 adults. As far as the water is concerned, I doubt your place is separately metered (being an apartment), so you probably can't charge them water.

 

[oh_noes]

My apartment is definitely seperate metered and it is also QLD Waterwise. So I'm definitely within my realms to make them pay for all water charges even without the increase in people.

and if you impress upon your initial tenant that he would be responsible for all the other residents

I'll definitely be pressing this with my current tenant.

 

[jaycee]

Only those named on the lease are responsible for the lease. So if you have 4 people living there and one named on the lease, you are asking for trouble. If anyone skips out, you can only chase the person on the lease.

Unless you have granted clear permission for them to sublet, and that person has their own leases in place. You'd want to watch that your landlord insurance (if you have it) will continue to cover you. If one of the people there damages the place, and they're not on the lease, the insurer may reject the claim.

Your call, but I'd check these if I was you.

Why wouldn't you just add the new people to the lease and avoid the drama ?

I'd do what Lizzie suggested.

Names on the lease. Water usage paid for by tenants.

 

[Perp]

Four people in a 2BR apartment is not going to exceed any occupancy requirements, as a family of 2 adults 2 kids could surely live in a 2BR apartment.

I'd be glad that the tenant has told you, and not just gone ahead and done it.

I'd want them all named on the lease so that I had recourse against 4 people rather than 1, and ensure that the new lease - with all names on it - has as an explicit condition that nobody other than people named on the lease can live at the premises.

Yes, the one person could be held responsible for all four if the main tenant sub-lets to three others, but that reduces your control over who is living there, and also reduces the potential asset base against which you have recourse if it all turns sour.

 

[wylie]

Yes, the one person could be held responsible for all four if the main tenant sub-lets to three others, but that reduces your control over who is living there, and also reduces the potential asset base against which you have recourse if it all turns sour.

Also, if the tenant who IS on the lease leaves for any reason (we had two instances where this was a real possibility) then you have three people who have no thing to lose if they decide to trash the place, stop paying rent or get in another couple to help them pay the rent. They would be in your house and you have no contract with them. How would you get them out if it turned ugly?

I would also get them on the lease.

 

[units4me]

I would ask for an extra, say $20/week to allow for extra wear and tear.

 

[Perp]

I would ask for an extra, say $20/week to allow for extra wear and tear.

I'd be a little cautious about this approach, because there's a good chance that the tenant will say "sod off, I'm not paying more rent", and will just let the others live there without putting them on the lease.

 

[wylie]

I'd be a little cautious about this approach, because there's a good chance that the tenant will say "sod off, I'm not paying more rent", and will just let the others live there without putting them on the lease.

Letting others live there without putting them on the lease is a breach of her lease and you could issue her with a Notice to Remedy Breach.

 

[bornfree]

Hi,
I just received an email from Tenant asking/questioning/requesting to have additional people stay in the apartment.

what's in it for you ?

 

[Perp]

Letting others live there without putting them on the lease is a breach of her lease and you could issue her with a Notice to Remedy Breach.

If you knew about it... my concern is just that the Tribunal is so tenant-friendly; if you can get four people on the lease rather than one, you should jump at it, whether there's extra $ attached or not.

I seriously doubt that the Tribunal would allow you to evict them for having others live there; the absolute most you'd get at Tribunal is for the Tribunal to order that the extra 3 people's names go on the lease, which is what they're already offering. I just can't see a Tribunal ordering 3 more names and a rent increase.

what's in it for you ?

Recourse against 4 incomes and 4 people's assets rather than one.