Landlords who don't allow working from home?

lucernarian

Hey all,

I've just been shown an email from a friend, who as a potential tenant was refused tenancy because he'd be working from home. Something about insurance and "Health and Safety" it was. I was gonna laugh at how silly it sounded, but thought I'd double check this.

I found nothing searching here or online. Is there *any* truth to this idea whatsoever?

awec

There is only an implication for insurance or H+S if your friends job would involve clients or customers visiting him in his home, or other people were coming to his house to work etc.

gibgodsman

lucernarian wrote: »

Hey all,

I've just been shown an email from a friend, who as a potential tenant was refused tenancy because he'd be working from home. Something about insurance and "Health and Safety" it was. I was gonna laugh at how silly it sounded, but thought I'd double check this.

I found nothing searching here or online. Is there *any* truth to this idea whatsoever?

Hard to answer without knowing what his job is?

lickalot

Well like probably understandable if a carpenter or something who wants to setup a workshop or something out the back or work on cars.

More to this than meets the eye to be honest. Why would you disclose it even to the Landlord if you were just sitting at a laptop all day.

lucernarian

He works in IT, just a laptop and internet sort of job. He mentioned it as good internet is required for his work. No visiting clients or anything like that

JimmyVik

If its an apartment the management company could be the ones making the rules and the landlord is just following that.

daithi7

I can fully understand it in 'room to let' letting, as the house owner is then providing both an office & a residential home.

On a general letting , I think it's debatable also tbh, I mean there's no doubt that providing a dwelling that provides a home office/ working solution that is utilised is going to get far more wear & tear than just providing a residential dwelling.... it could be legitimate grounds for a landlord (who was agreeing to home working) to be able to charge more legimately surely?!

I mean many workers get an allowance from their employers if they work from home, I think it's perfectly reasonable that a landlord charges more to facilitate this also.

MacDanger

lucernarian wrote: »

Hey all,

I've just been shown an email from a friend, who as a potential tenant was refused tenancy because he'd be working from home. Something about insurance and "Health and Safety" it was. I was gonna laugh at how silly it sounded, but thought I'd double check this.

I found nothing searching here or online. Is there *any* truth to this idea whatsoever?

It sounds like a BS excuse from the LL imo but it's their property so they're entitled to let to whoever they want. Maybe your friend shouldn't mention it the next time I guess

whomitconcerns

Your entitled to peaceful enjoyment of your home and that restriction would not work in law. Tell him that's grand I won't work from home so, nothing he can do about it. Unless you do mean he is running a business from that address is the company is based at that address. That would not be allowed in a lot of leases

lucernarian

daithi7 wrote: »

I can fully understand it in 'room to let' letting, as the house owner is then providing both an office & a residential home.

On a general letting , I think it's debatable also tbh, I mean there's no doubt that providing a dwelling that provides a home office/ working solution that is utilised is going to get far more wear & tear than just providing a residential dwelling.... it could be legitimate grounds for a landlord (who was agreeing to home working) to be able to charge more legimately surely?!

I mean many workers get an allowance from their employers if they work from home, I think it's perfectly reasonable that a landlord charges more to facilitate this also.

Thats a different story though, people can set what prices they may for various circumstances. In this case, the tenancy was denied outright.

As for people being paid to work extra at home, lol. Is that for some public service jobs? I can't imagine it and don't know anyone who got paid more during this situation, only the opposite.

lucernarian

lickalot wrote: »

Well like probably understandable if a carpenter or something who wants to setup a workshop or something out the back or work on cars.

More to this than meets the eye to be honest. Why would you disclose it even to the Landlord if you were just sitting at a laptop all day.

You make it sound like the hundreds of thousands working remotely are some kind of conspiracy

Uncle Pierre

lucernarian wrote: »

As for people being paid to work extra at home, lol. Is that for some public service jobs? I can't imagine it and don't know anyone who got paid more during this situation, only the opposite.

There's been a provision in place for a few years now (so it's not Covid-19 related), where an employer can pay an employee an allowance of up to €3.20 per day, tax free, for working from home.

Idea is that it helps cover the costs of light, heat, etc., that you wouldn't normally incur during that time if you were in an office instead.

It's not a public sector thing, as I'm in the public sector now myself, and we got a memo early on in this whole thing to say no extra allowance would be paid for working from home.

However, I did use to get it in a previous job (private sector), and my wife's workplace (also private sector) paid it from late March to late June, while their offices were completely closed. Reckon the way they saw it, they were saving money themselves on electricity, etc., so they gave it to the workers who were using it at home instead.

Still works out at just €16 per week though, so it wouldn't really justify a landlord charging extra rent because somebody's working from home, either part-time or full-time.

lickalot

lucernarian wrote: »

You make it sound like the hundreds of thousands working remotely are some kind of conspiracy

I'm working from home the last four months, just find it strange that someone would even bother mention it to a Landlord is all or the Landlord would have an issue with it.

Maybe the Landlord was trying to avoid taxes and registering or something and thought working from home would flag it.

Donald Trump

Would the landlord be living there as well?

If that was the case he'd be perfectly justified

punisher5112

In future let the friend know, internet connection speeds can be got online from the providers with the address.

I can't understand why the Landlord is even giving a reason for refusing an applicant, or why a tenant would even say that he was going to be working from home. Is this a wind up?

It sounds legit to me. One of the stipulations of my house insurance (which was a standard requirement in all quotes I got) was that I'm not using my residence for work.

Of course, this is probably a standard clause from back when working in the home meant hairdressers/childminding/a home practice such as dentist/doctor, etc. I doubt it's really meant to apply to the many office workers who are now working remotely at their laptops, but an insurer could take you up on this technicality if you put a claim in and you were found to be working from home.

I'd say the landlord is genuinely just concerned that if he/she needed to make a claim, there's email evidence showing that they knew the tenant was using the residence for work purposes.

dennyk

Some landlords want tenants who are in the place as little as possible, figuring there will somehow be less wear and tear. Or else they're a bit paranoid or out of touch and don't really grasp the concept of "working remotely" and assume the tenant is going to be running a traditional business of some sort out of their sitting room and making a mess or causing all sorts of damage and/or disruption.

As for how it would come up, OP noted that their friend asked about the Internet service; probably just casually mentioned "Oh, I'll need reliable Internet as I work from home", not figuring it would be a big deal.

Now, if this is a house share situation, then I could certainly understand the landlord's reluctance; they might not want a live-in tenant who's going to be around literally 24/7, or who they're going to have to tiptoe around for 40+ hours a week for fear of disrupting their work.

daithi7 wrote: »

On a general letting , I think it's debatable also tbh, I mean there's no doubt that providing a dwelling that provides a home office/ working solution that is utilised is going to get far more wear & tear than just providing a residential dwelling.... it could be legitimate grounds for a landlord (who was agreeing to home working) to be able to charge more legimately surely?!

The point of the reimbursement/tax break is to compensate employees for providing their own electricity, Internet service, heating, etc. during work hours and setting up a space in their home to work from. If the tenant is paying for their own utilities, a landlord has no reason to charge more for them working from home at a desk job. "More wear and tear" is a ridiculous excuse; sitting in a chair (which the tenant probably bought themselves, since I've never seen a rental property with an office setup provided) for an extra 40 hours a week, flushing the toilet a few more times a day, and maybe using the kitchen to prepare a few more meals a week hardly justifies jacking up the rent. What's next, landlords requiring their tenants to wear FitBits while at home and fining them for taking too many steps per day and causing more "wear and tear" on the flooring?

lucernarian

lucernarian wrote: »

He works in IT, just a laptop and internet sort of job. He mentioned it as good internet is required for his work. No visiting clients or anything like that

Hmmmmm, perhaps the landlord has been stung by hookers before??

Samuel T. Cogley

Was part of my insurance renewal that the only working from home was incidental office work.

JimmyVik

Dav010 wrote: »

I can't understand why the Landlord is even giving a reason for refusing an applicant, or why a tenant would even say that he was going to be working from home. Is this a wind up?

Very good point.

lucernarian

Dav010 wrote: »

I can't understand why the Landlord is even giving a reason for refusing an applicant, or why a tenant would even say that he was going to be working from home. Is this a wind up?

Of all the replies, this sticks out. Seems obvious why someone would ask about good internet cause they need it for their job. These are all house shares btw, and I know some people don't want fixed line contracts or installations carried out in their premises for one. My friend hadn't encountered any issues in his search using the same template text for other places before or since. The majority of places he's viewed so far have had people also working from home since the lockdown started.

He never heard any more from the landlord, not that there's any point talking about a rejected offer to view/let once the decision's been made.

I wonder if some of the people commenting on this have ever house shared in their working life, to think my story is a piss take...

lucernarian

dennyk wrote: »

Some landlords want tenants who are in the place as little as possible, figuring there will somehow be less wear and tear. Or else they're a bit paranoid or out of touch and don't really grasp the concept of "working remotely" and assume the tenant is going to be running a traditional business of some sort out of their sitting room and making a mess or causing all sorts of damage and/or disruption.

As for how it would come up, OP noted that their friend asked about the Internet service; probably just casually mentioned "Oh, I'll need reliable Internet as I work from home", not figuring it would be a big deal.

Now, if this is a house share situation, then I could certainly understand the landlord's reluctance; they might not want a live-in tenant who's going to be around literally 24/7, or who they're going to have to tiptoe around for 40+ hours a week for fear of disrupting their work.



The point of the reimbursement/tax break is to compensate employees for providing their own electricity, Internet service, heating, etc. during work hours and setting up a space in their home to work from. If the tenant is paying for their own utilities, a landlord has no reason to charge more for them working from home at a desk job. "More wear and tear" is a ridiculous excuse; sitting in a chair (which the tenant probably bought themselves, since I've never seen a rental property with an office setup provided) for an extra 40 hours a week, flushing the toilet a few more times a day, and maybe using the kitchen to prepare a few more meals a week hardly justifies jacking up the rent. What's next, landlords requiring their tenants to wear FitBits while at home and fining them for taking too many steps per day and causing more "wear and tear" on the flooring?

Yeah that's my take on it after thinking about it and asking around. I've actually asked a couple of landlords I know and they've mentioned nothing about extra wear and tear since lockdown. Cookers don't really break, washing machines and tumble dryers are used as much as before, same with showers and bathrooms mostly. The beds are used as often as before obviously, and the front door is used less

I think my friend is avoiding any house sharing where the owner lives there because of the lack of rights and stuff, but I'll confirm later.

JimmyVik

lucernarian wrote: »

Yeah that's my take on it after thinking about it and asking around. I've actually asked a couple of landlords I know and they've mentioned nothing about extra wear and tear since lockdown. Cookers don't really break, washing machines and tumble dryers are used as much as before, same with showers and bathrooms mostly. The beds are used as often as before obviously, and the front door is used less

I think my friend is avoiding any house sharing where the owner lives there because of the lack of rights and stuff, but I'll confirm later.

Is it a house share or his own place he is looking for.
I can see how peoiple in a house share would be against having someone working from home sharing with them.

CoffeeBean2

As was argued here many times before, a house is for residential use only, not for running a business!

If you need a planning change of usage to operate an Airbnb, surely you should also need the same if you indent to work (full time) from home

ZeroThreat

Mr.S wrote: »

You are joking, right? Ahahah

Why not? Everyone has to wet their beak in some way.

micah537

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Was part of my insurance renewal that the only working from home was incidental office work.

From an insurance point of view, wouldn't there be less risk if working from home.

Less chance of a break-in, if a pipe burst or fire started you would know quicker so less damage done.


Told the landlady in 2016 when viewing the house that I worked from home most days. She couldn't care less once the rent is paid.

CoffeeBean2

Mr.S wrote: »

An employee working from home =/ running a business. Try again.

If you are working in the private sector and you are not helping run a business while working, I would argue that you are not working at all, or your employer does not need you.

Samuel T. Cogley

micah537 wrote: »

From an insurance point of view, wouldn't there be less risk if working from home.

Less chance of a break-in, if a pipe burst or fire started you would know quicker so less damage done.


Told the landlady in 2016 when viewing the house that I worked from home most days. She couldn't care less once the rent is paid.

You'd have to ask the insurer.

CoffeeBean2

CoffeeBean2 wrote: »

If you are working in the private sector and you are not helping run a business while working, I would argue that you are not working at all, or your employer does not need you.

Working from home is not running a business from home end of story.

Even running many businesses from home does not require chance of use, for instance a farm house is the HQ of a farming business and they will have normal residential.

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

You'd have to ask the insurer.

I would safely say there isn’t a single person working from home even having the thought enter their head that they would say anything to their insurer as there is simply no need, working from home for a company is absolutely no different to just living in the house.

lucernarian

CoffeeBean2 wrote: »

If you are working in the private sector and you are not helping run a business while working, I would argue that you are not working at all, or your employer does not need you.

Are you joking?

There's hundreds of thousands working in the services industry and in IT who are working from home and aren't close to "running a business". I take it you are unfamiliar with these industries. An example would be a web developer. Are they helping to run Amazon/Google/Facebook? NO. Are they required for the core business? YES.

micah537 wrote:

From an insurance point of view, wouldn't there be less risk if working from home.

Less chance of a break-in, if a pipe burst or fire started you would know quicker so less damage done.

Good points there, wouldn't apply so much with landlord-type property insurance as it doesn't cover contents but certainly less risk of criminal damage or burst pipe damage.

Given the crazy replies by some people here, maybe the timing of this is perfect: https://dbei.gov.ie/en/Consultations/Public-Consultation-on-Guidance-for-Remote-Working.html although it's coming from an employment perspective, if there are a lot of doubts about insurance cover, landlord liability etc, these are all relevant matters that the govt should consider here.

Samuel T. Cogley

Cairo Microscopic Chalkboard wrote: »

I would safely say there isn’t a single person working from home even having the thought enter their head that they would say anything to their insurer as there is simply no need, working from home for a company is absolutely no different to just living in the house.

When I'm directly asked as part of the renewal of my Landlord's insurance if there is working from home going on, you can bet your bottom dollar I'm going to answer honestly and not risk having my insurance voided. If the Insurer says no working from home or working from home only under X condition, that's getting passed on to the tenants.

listermint

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

When I'm directly asked as part of the renewal of my Landlord's insurance if there is working from home going on, you can bet your bottom dollar I'm going to answer honestly and not risk having my insurance voided. If the Insurer says no working from home or working from home only under X condition, that's getting passed on to the tenants.

What if say you are unemployed.

Should you not be in your house during office hours....?

Samuel T. Cogley

listermint wrote: »

What if say you are unemployed.

Should you not be in your house during office hours....?

You'd have to ask the insurer, but that wasn't one of the questions asked.

ednwireland

look up most standard tenancy agreements and you'll find something like

5. The Tenant shall not carry out in the property any profession or business whatsoever whether for gain or otherwise. Should the Tenant contravene this regulation, this Agreement shall terminate immediately, but without prejudice to any antecedent rights of the Landlord.

which i suspect covers working form home. im sure my tenancy agreement has it in. i would think it means running your business from home not working from home but it doesnt say that

lucernarian

ednwireland wrote: »

look up most standard tenancy agreements and you'll find something like



which i suspect covers working form home. im sure my tenancy agreement has it in. i would think it means running your business from home not working from home but it doesnt say that

If things like that are brought up in the Department of Business and Enterprise consultation, I can forsee such clauses in tenant agreements being made illegal if it prevents people working from home while their office is closed.

ednwireland

lucernarian wrote: »

If things like that are brought up in the Department of Business and Enterprise consultation, I can forsee such clauses in tenant agreements being made illegal if it prevents people working from home while their office is closed.

they need to be ! and thats as a landlord

making it illegal isnt going to help sorting out the undrelying reasons for why a clause like that might be there is whats needed (not that thats going to happen gov. doesnt do underlying causes)

lucernarian

ednwireland wrote: »

they need to be ! and thats as a landlord

making it illegal isnt going to help sorting out the undrelying reasons for why a clause like that might be there is whats needed (not that thats going to happen gov. doesnt do underlying causes)

I think it's the 20th century thinking of insurers and many people (even some on this thread) who don't get the realities of modern technology and careers. Like, I look at insurance forms and I don't have a clue what my exact current job role could be called. Maybe years ago everyone could describe their job or position in one word but i don't think so now.

and some of it comes from risk averse top-down thinking. E.g. the management company randomly decides something, which spooks the landlord, which then reaches the tenant. A similar example might be pets. On continental Europe most places would allow for small animals to be kept, in Ireland at least it seems to be the opposite.

Samuel T. Cogley

More that, although the government might not do underlying clauses, they are completely beholden to the insurance industry. If a LL can't get insurance for someone to work from home there's not a lot they can do about it. That said incidental office work was fine.

Claw Hammer

Cairo Microscopic Chalkboard wrote: »

Working from home is not running a business from home end of story.

Even running many businesses from home does not require chance of use, for instance a farm house is the HQ of a farming business and they will have normal residential.



I would safely say there isn’t a single person working from home even having the thought enter their head that they would say anything to their insurer as there is simply no need, working from home for a company is absolutely no different to just living in the house.

Just because something doesn't enter anyone's head, does not mean it is a live issue. Most house insurance policies only ensure goods for personal use.
The trouble with working from home is that work items are not covered by the household insurance. There may be no cover if the laptop is stolen from the house for example.

Samuel T. Cogley

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

More that, although the government might not do underlying clauses, they are completely beholden to the insurance industry. If a LL can't get insurance for someone to work from home there's not a lot they can do about it. That said incidental office work was fine.

It’s nonsense, no difference between someone sitting at home all day on Facebook on their laptop or working on their laptop. People are going out looking for things to try stir the s*it with.

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Just because something doesn't enter anyone's head, does not mean it is a live issue. Most house insurance policies only ensure goods for personal use.
The trouble with working from home is that work items are not covered by the household insurance. There may be no cover if the laptop is stolen from the house for example.

Who is to say it’s a work laptop? I use my work laptop as my personal laptop also.

gauchesnell

hi

Ive recently been looking for a new place to live and yes I have been turned down because I am working from home at present. I work in admin with a work laptop so nothing disruptive.

defo an issue

Claw Hammer

Cairo Microscopic Chalkboard wrote: »

It’s nonsense, no difference between someone sitting at home all day on Facebook on their laptop or working on their laptop. People are going out looking for things to try stir the s*it with.



Who is to say it’s a work laptop? I use my work laptop as my personal laptop also.

Have you ever had insurance investigate a claim? Have you ever heard of material non-disclosure. Insurance requires the utmost good faith. This is the adult world not the nursery.

Graham

From Allianz:

Is Working From Home Covered by Home Insurance?
“Home Insurance generally covers individuals working from home, whether lone workers or employees of a business offering agile working. But if customers start visiting a property, if there are activities like manufacturing and if there's any stock at the property, which could lead to a higher risk of theft, that's where the risk increases. If those conditions exist, Allianz assess the situation on a case by case basis. It's not about the size of the company. I could be running a multimillion euro company by myself from my bedroom. It's more about the increase in risk.”

From 123.ie

Am I covered to work from home?
For Home Insurance Customers
We will cover you to work from home dealing with paperwork, phone calls and a computer only.

This does not include any commercial use, (e.g. visitors to the premises in relation to your work, holding stock in connection with your work etc.) even if you have a separate business or public liability policy.

From AIG

Am I covered by my home insurance if I work from home?
Our Home Cover (Essential or Plus) contents policy section automatically provides cover for Home office equipment up to €3,000 ( under Home Cover Premium limit increased to €6,000) used for occasional clerical work at home and where no business clients visit the home. Please call us if you require your home cover to be extended for any business use other than as described above.

gauchesnell

yeah Id have to agree. I have found somewhere and much much cheaper than what I was paying but I need to protect the work items I have in my home so they are constantly locked up.

Definitely are are some LLs who dont want people who work from home - even though we have no choice at present.

Lux23

Uncle Pierre wrote: »

There's been a provision in place for a few years now (so it's not Covid-19 related), where an employer can pay an employee an allowance of up to €3.20 per day, tax free, for working from home.

In the Public Sector, you claim this in your tax return at the end of the year, the employer won't pay it for you.

Humour Me

The irony here is that the majority of insurance company employees have all been working from home for months. If their staff advised that they couldn’t WFH because of their landlords insurance, they wouldn’t be long changing the insurance conditions.

My own landlord is well aware that a number of us are working from home. He only asked if the broadband was holding up.

Lux23

What does it even mean?

Graham

I think the suggestion is 'working from home' and 'running a business from home' are the same thing.

Alrigghtythen

Your employer should do a health and safety assessment of your at home workplace.

Alrigghtythen

Alrigghtythen wrote: »

Your employer should do a health and safety assessment of your at home workplace.

Dear God.