Tenants making viewings difficult

[areweonabreak]

We have a flat that we rent out. It was my DH’s flat before we met. It’s been rented out for 10 years now (by only 2 tenants) but we’re now in a position where our own house needs a lot of money spending on it and we want to free up some capital.

we do feel bad for the current tenant, we offered them first refusal to buy the flat (it’s on the market for £90k) but they cannot afford it (even though a mortgage would probably be cheaper than the rent but they’d another thread)

we’ve had a few viewings now but all the feedback is that the tenants have told them that they don’t want to move so they’re put off as they don’t want the hassle.

we live about a 40 minute drive away from the flat so the agents are sorting out all of the viewings. The agents have suggested that it might be easier to sell if it’s empty.

We’re really not sure what to do, they’re on a rolling monthly contract at the moment.

has anyone else been in this position before?

would anyone else recommend selling as a vacant property?

It's not insanity really. The property market is hardly moving in some areas, and the tenant could be a potential buyer with the incentive to them of already living there, so no move required.

Or give them notice, could be a long drawn out process, and then have the property sitting empty for months, and be forced to keep cutting the price. It all depends on the area of course, but I think most areas will be dropping in price soon if they haven't already.

''@IkBenDeMol · Today 14:40
Evict them. (And ignore the people who think landlords are the devil incarnate). A stroppy tenant who is making viewings awkward would ring huge alarm bells for me - they probably won't leave, it'll drag on for months, they'll trash the place before leaving.''

Truly tone deaf...

The landlord needs to serve proper notice. They have not even done that yet.

The tenants have done nothing wrong so far. They don't even have to allow viewings legally.

Absolutely abysmal that you suggest tenants by default will refuse to leave or ''trash the place''.

The landlord here is the one who has made the mistake to put the house on the market without making sure it was vacant first, which would have made viewings/sale much easier.

It is purely because they want to continue to get the rent for as long as possible...

Try a bit of common sense.

I have lots of common sense, thanks. I know that as a BUYER who is in the position of power with having the cash and looking to purchase, that if I walked into a house occupied by a surly and awkward tenant who went out of their way to comment that they didn't want to leave that alarm bells would be going off very loudly. However nice the property - potential for a nightmare tenant and the purchase to drag on for months. Just too much hassle. Obivously not every disgruntled tenant is going to trash their rented house but some might and it's just not a risk/hassle worth taking.

Mn would never suggest that someone sells a property when they first move in together in case it doesn’t work.

Exactly. The op would be called dim and told off about how she is putting herself into vulnerable situation with "just rent it and sell later"

That still doesn't make it not a choice. A choice being the advisable option under the circumstances doesn't make it not a choice.

Yep.

The tenant has already said they can't afford it, which I think may have been missed, and so the issue is moot. But actually, them buying the property for a reduced price could've still been financially beneficial to OP too, as well as involving less time and stress.

You've tried to allow them as long as possible to find somewhere else while selling. If they're going to be difficult just kick em out and sell vacant.

So everyone should keep a fall-back property in case their relationship ends? That's realistic 😃

Some of the replies on here are ridiculous. OP isn't a slum landlord, and she asked an honest question. Think some of you lot expect her to let them live there forever or just give them the flat.

And being evicted is part of the inbuilt risk of being a tenant.

No, just don't moan about it when decisions motivated by greed come back and bite you in the bum.

Issue a s21. They know you’re selling so that wont be a surprise.
They move out
You have a tidy, mend stuff, make it presentable.
Put back on the market to sell.

You should get a better price aswell, plus there’s no hassle with getting the ok from tenants for every viewing.

As an aside, against advice my cousin tried to sell with tenants still there. ( they had been given notice ) Got a low offer, took it. Couldn’t get the tenants out. Three months down the line, lost the sale.

Greed? 😂

What so she's supposed to not sell her housd to keep the tenants happy? That's bonkers.

Presumably anybody who buys a house is also greedy as they could've kept renting and donated the deposit to charity, right?

No, the greed comes from the decision to rent the property out in the first place, rather than sell.

No. But like many things, if you have the option to make things more secure for yourselves that’s what they would suggest.

It’s amazing the hoops that people are jumping through on this thread to imply that people are meaning one thing when that’s not actually what they’ve said.
The Op has had it tenfold.

@PlaitBilledDuckyPuss
If everyone had this attitude, there would be no properties to rent and even more homelessness.

Don’t let jealousy get in the way of sensible advice for the OP
Not that your comment is advice, it’s a nasty, unhelpful comment

See, ridiculous comment. Perhaps they didn't have the money to sell at the time, it ain't a cheap process. We dont know circumstances. Not all landlords are greedy AH. 🙄

Nonsense - there would be more properties on the market to buy, so properties would be more affordable.

No jealousy - I have a house that I own, and I live in it. I was fortunate to be able to get on the ladder in the 1990s, before prices went insane.

May be worth applying to the LA to see if they offer a discount - some do, but for a limited period. Isn’t there also a 50% increase in council tax due on the property if it’s still empty and unfurnished after 2 years ?

Many people do this with inherited properties rather than sell, because they don’t have pensions, so rely on the income. Not greed, just common sense.

This is one of the funniest comments i have ever read…. @MzHz
Really 😂😂😂😂😂😂

But why focus on this and ignore the many other things people do like not buying from sustainable sources etc?

A couple having a cheap property they rent out isn't particularly high on the wealthy fatcat scale. They can't be that rich if they need to sell it to buy.

Stop with the jealousy.

Total lack of common sense if they haven't made pension provision - what would they have done if the property they inherited had had to be sold to pay care fees for its occupant? Their tenants are paying for their poor planning.

Not everyone can afford to buy, irrespective of increase in housing stock.
Your comments are not helpful or relevant to OP question.

There are threads for landlords for you to preach to.