Two people paying the same monthly rent for similar bedrooms can have very different lodger rights if they are asked to leave, depending on whether one shares a kitchen, bathroom or living room with the landlord.
Property lawyers warn that renters living in a landlord’s main home may count as lodgers, and potentially excluded occupiers, rather than assured tenants. The outcome depends on whether the arrangement is a tenancy or a licence and on its terms. In some cases the landlord may be able to end it without a court possession order, and the deposit may not need to sit in a government-approved tenancy deposit scheme.
The distinction carries more weight following reforms under the Renters’ Rights Act, because people renting rooms may wrongly assume the protections publicised for private tenants automatically cover their own living arrangement.
“The word ‘renter’ is used to describe many different living arrangements, but the law does not give everyone who pays rent the same protection,” said Lisa Blythe, property recovery solicitor at SE-Solicitors.
“A person renting a room from a live-in landlord may be a lodger and, depending on what facilities they share, may be an excluded occupier with significantly fewer rights than an assured tenant.”
“The label at the top of an agreement is not the whole answer,” she said. “Calling somebody a tenant does not necessarily make them one and calling an agreement a licence does not automatically remove tenancy rights. The reality of the arrangement, particularly whether the landlord lives in the property and shares a kitchen, bathroom or living room is crucial.”
Why lodger rights can hinge on a shared kitchen
A person who lives in their landlord’s main home and shares a kitchen, bathroom or living room with them is likely to be an excluded occupier. The notice required depends on whether the arrangement is an excluded tenancy or an excluded licence, as well as the agreement and the circumstances. Once it has lawfully ended, the landlord may not need a court possession order before requiring the occupier to leave.
“Two people can each pay monthly rent for a bedroom and still have very different rights,” she explained. “One may be protected by the new assured-tenancy regime, while the other may be able to remain only until reasonable notice expires.”
“That difference becomes critical when the relationship with the landlord breaks down,” she noted. “A lodger may assume that the landlord must use the same eviction process that applies to other private renters, only to discover that their legal position is much less secure.”
How the living arrangement affects legal status
Somebody who rents from a landlord living elsewhere may be an assured tenant and benefit from the protections attached to that status. Where the landlord lives in the property and shares a kitchen, bathroom or living room, the renter may be a lodger and excluded occupier, which is where lodger rights are weakest. A person living in the landlord’s property but not sharing living space may instead be an occupier with basic protection, for whom a court order will generally be required.
“Do not wait until you are being asked to leave to establish what rights you have,” Blythe added. “Keep the agreement, proof of payments and any messages about the arrangement. If the paperwork describes something different from how the property is actually occupied, take advice rather than assuming the heading decides the issue.”
“For homeowners, the same warning applies in reverse,” she continued. “Taking in a lodger without setting out rent, notice, bills, guests and use of shared spaces can turn a practical arrangement into a personal and legal dispute. A clear written agreement protects both sides, but it must reflect the arrangement that exists in practice.”
