To avoid any doubt, a licensed occupant is not a transgressor or squatter. Remember that they are named on the lease, but not as tenants. Their existence in the property is known and agreed upon. They will usually be given a number of keys and at least they will have been honest enough to reveal their planned occupation as opposed to sneaking into the property a week after the rent began to disclose. Their legal status will be that of a “guest” or a “licensee” or a “guest” of the tenant. However, if the rent is offered and accepted, there is a strong presumption that the “authorized occupants” are now tenants. They could of course claim that they were only paying rent “on behalf of the tenant,” which could complicate matters. If there are no objectively justified reasons, it is best to avoid this situation. The best rule is that all residents over the age of 18 in the contract are tenants. This is because in most leases, there is a typical sublease clause.
Tenants cannot sublet all or part of the property without the landlord`s permission. Of course, even authorized occupants are themselves vulnerable. If something happens to the principal tenant, they can quickly find themselves homeless, with very little legal protection for full tenants. There is a reason why most municipal taxes, licensing schemes and occupancy rules are based on the number of people who actually live in a property and not on the number of tenants. If you live in a property with two licensed occupants, you cannot start receiving a tax reduction for one person, and if you are a five-person HMO licensee, you cannot have five tenants and three authorized occupants residing there. A room that is too small for a tenant is also too small for a licensed occupant. Approved occupants should exercise a high degree of caution. First, it is a question of determining why the potential resident wishes to be a licensed occupant and not a tenant.
Second, an agency should not behave with what a potential tenant does or does not want to do in such a situation. It should behave with the needs of the owner in mind. As a general rule, there is no valid reason why someone over the age of 18 should not be a tenant. If a person renounces the lease as a licensed occupier, he is not a party, he has no contractual obligations and, above all, he is not even required to pay the rent. They could even be tried for non-payment, and the application would fail. As there is no contract between the owner and the authorized occupier, the landlord should evict the tenant for rent and initiate separate legal proceedings to evict the authorized occupier. This becomes a problem when the tenant moves, since the authorized occupier can remain legitimate because the tenant has admitted them into the property.