To offer a Landlord's perspective

[RoseWay]

There's been a lot of bashing of Landlords on here of late, land-owning class etc. I thought I'd share some experiences to offer an insight into why many are so paranoid about their property.

Background: we rented a family house out whilst we worked elsewhere near jobs.

Tennant 1: 6 months until first check, hadn't used heating all winter (we know for sure from bills no gas used) to save £ and had dried clothes inside. Worse damp across the property I've ever seen, left with 2 months rent unpaid, advised not worth pursuing due to chance of getting money back as gone abroad.

No. 2: Man, partner was his carer as he couldn't walk. Constantly sabotaged property (e.g. disconnecting waste water pipe, unscrewing bits in the boiler, removing floorboards) then calling environmental health. Seemed to be linked to trying to get council house but never really understood why. Maybe another reason. Intially thought problems were genuine until plumbers etc started poiting out deliberate damage. Turned out to be working as a roofer of all things and left shortly after causing a lot of damage to ours, including removing entire outhouse roof (???) Left owing rent, not reclaimed.

no. 3: we nearly lost lease due to action from neighbours due to noise.left owing rent.

no. 4: didn't clean in entire tennacy. Kitchen in particular so sticky shoes stuck to the floor. carpets ruined. junk in cellar/ outhouse about 4 skips worth.

All left withoutpaying rent worth more than the deposit plus an average damage of £500-£1000 (when fixing ourselves, not using anyone if possible)

Now we're moving back, out of pocket due to all the repairs etc. and to a very very poor condition house which was once lovely.

Not all tennans are like this, but I'm trying to share that not all landlords are greedy scum either. It's a horrible thing to rent your own home out and know all the risks, even if you try to be a wonderful landlord.

I agree, MissMavis. but also, there is a confusion with some landlords between fault and responsibility, on their own part.
I had a very annoying landlord who used to try to charge me (and sometimes suceeded because I had a tiny baby and was tired) for repairs to things because it was not his fault that it had broken. No, but it is not my fault either. And it is your responsibility. He thought that unless the thing had been installed broken, or about to break, how could he help it, so why should he pay? and hated to get proper people in so would spend hours in the evenings fiddling about trying to mend things, asking for buckets / screwdrivers / torches, while dd grizzled on my shoulder and I felt very odd about bfing IN MY HOME. Ugh.

I thought Indesit was a good brand. B are variable. I have two B appliances, and one Indesit at present. One B* is poor. One is absolutely fine. The indesit is fine, but I do have to follow the cleaning instructions. Otherwise it stops working.

if they are provided with the essential manuals of the appliances...

I know they can clean. I'm bloody renting said Indesit now! I'm sorry if you took my comment personally; I was thinking about brands of kitchen appliances. My MIL is amazed when she sees me scrubbing away with a toothbrush- she says she's never had to do that with her (owned) one in 15 years. Are indesits more maintenance heavy than other brands?

In that case I would also observe that there seems to a common assumption that, because someone is a landlord, they are automatically going to cheat and neglect their tenants in every action they take to do with the tenancy.

Tenants neglecting property? Landlord's fault-should have inspected more frequently!

Landlord wants to inspect the property? Outrageous imposition on tenant's rights!

Tenants didn't pay agreed rent? Landlord's fault- should have chosen more carefully in the first place!

Landlord requests references/credit checks? Outrageous assumption that tenant isn't good for the tenancy!

Basically, you can't win as a landlord- you'll always be painted as a villain regardless of what you do or don't do.

Oh but I should just suck that up, shouldn't I, because I'm making so much lovely money...(not).

That's a good point MousyMouse. There weren't any instructions for the Indesit when I moved into this place. I had to search the interwebs, and download the instruction manual. That was annoying.

Nobody has to rent out property though do they?

Even accidental landlords get some say in it.

People that have no choice but to rent are stuck with their lot. Changes need to happen, and fast!

Some tenants don't clean and are careless, others are not. The same with normal people. Of course it is annoying when someone damages your property by being careless or worse.

But there is sometimes a misunderstanding, that if anything at all breaks, it's the tenant's fault. I think it's similar to the misunderstanding about wear and tear. Some LL don't know that 'fair wear and tear' is allowed, and you can't use the deposit to make the condition of the place better than it should be after 'fair wear and tear' over the period of the tenancy.

If my cooker, which is I guess around 30 years old, breaks down, it is highly unlikely to be my fault - it's just on its last legs. That's fair enough, I knew that when I rented this place. But the LL also needs to know that, if it breaks, unless I did something to it, they can't expect me to pay for a new one.

(They don't, btw, I'm just using this as an example.)

silver - I certainly dont think all LL will cheat or neglect.

There is a minority of bad and dishonest LL (as you'd expect).
There are quite a lot of bad, dishonest agents.
There are quite a lot of LL who mean well, but didn't think it mattered to learn what their rights and responsibilities are, or don't understand what they mean.
There are quite a lot of tenants who also don't know these things.

It's about communicating and getting a better legal framework for all of us, I think.

True, no one is forcing me to do this. I'm lucky in that I'm not obliged to rent my house because of some hideous negative equity trap, I do accept that.

I do get quite bored of seeing the same old things being trotted out on these threads. Yes, there are shit landlords and shit tenants alike, but the underlying assumption about landlords is that they are all shysters out for a quick buck.

It gets really irritating to see that lots of people seem to think that I shouldn't be pissed off when a careless tenant has wrecked stuff, in fact some of them go almost as far as saying I should be grateful for everything I have to deal with, purely because I'm getting rent for a property.

Totally agreed about the whole problem of matching expectations, by the way, and yes, LLs should bother to find out exactly what they can and can't do.

Personally I see this as a basic responsibility in life: if you are an adult and are going to be dealing with other adults in a business context, you really should take the time to work out what the rules are.

However there are some tenants out there who also need to adjust their expectations, if some opinions given on threads like this one are to be believed.

I'm not trying to knock LLs who don't find out about the law - many tenants don't either. I think (unfortunately) we can't expect people to do it off their own bats, so there needs to be a framework in place to make sure everyone knows where they stand.

We are moving to the UK at the end of the year and will probably rent for 6-12 months to make sure we are happy in our new town before buying.

This thread is freaking me out.

Personally, I can't see that introducing more regulation will make a lot of difference to the actual problem (that of rules of tenancies not being abided by).

I can, however, envisage it putting rents up, because it's going to cost money, which is going to be factored into the whole system and hit both the LL's bottom line and the tenant's rent costs alike.

Shyster LLs will still be shysters, because they don't care about the rules we currently have, let alone any new ones. And LLs who do a decent job will either suck it up (with the knock-on effects on costs), or sell their properties (to shysters) and invest elsewhere.

Bad tenants will still be bad tenants, for the same reasons. But probably worse, because their rents will be higher. And good tenants won't be helped either, but they will be more out of pocket as well.

If there were better mediation services to help manage the conflicts between LLs and tenants, that would probably help the actual practical problems of lack of maintenance from LLs or lack of maintenance from tenants in some cases. A good agent can sometimes perform this role really well. A bad agent is simply a parasite in the whole process.

Well, the thing is, many people won't spend a penny on maintaining a home when they're living in it. They just "make do" and expect tenants to do the same. I remember hearing an anecdote from a letting agent, who had to explain to a prospective landlord that he would have to mend the hot water system before he could let the house. The customer was nonplussed, as he was managing perfectly fine with his kettle arrangement!

silver - I think we're talking about similar things, you say mediations services, I say a better framework ... same difference.

I would like to see agents properly regulated. They make money off both LL and tenants and can be appalling.

..and I guess that customer could have had a point, IF he was prepared to accept a rent which was MUCH lower than the norm for that type of house, AND find a tenant who was happy to accept it in that state. A decent agent would have managed to adjust the LL's expectations to a realistic level.

(not a totally bonkers thing: my DH and I had to handle renting my FIL's house at short notice when the long-term tenant left suddenly and FIL couldn't take it on. House had no central heating, needed a new kitchen and there was no mains gas: we rented it for a knock-down price on the condition that the tenants put a new kitchen in and accepted that it was going to be a bit parky if they didn't have the fire on. Said tenants had a lovely time there for a couple of years until they'd saved a deposit to buy their own place (they asked to buy the house, so it can't have been that bad!))

I don't really think MOST tenants need to 'adjust their expectations' silverten. The only 'expectations' I have really seen expressed on this thread are really that people want to be left alone as much as possible to have 'quiet enjoyment' of the property as is their right, have all fixtures, fittings and appliances in full working order/repaired within a reasonable time frame (which is fair enough considering that we pay for them to be so) and not be blamed when when stuff (e.g. boiler, dishwasher) breaks due to circs beyond our control (e.g. poor choice of model, lack of maintenance etc). I don't think that's too much to ask.

I do however agree with inspections (did you never inspect the people who ruined your brand new carpet or showerhead?). I don't like the intrusion but sometimes they bring benefits - like my last landlord was really impressed with the standard of upkeep he said he wouldn't raise the rent at contract renewal.

I was a little about my current LL on the original thread (as they use my home as a personal storage facility) but feel bad for complaining as got a letter yesterday and the lovely lovely people have let me have a cat (and are happy for me to redecorate). Yippee!

Precisely Silverten. Life being what it is, some people will always find such adjustment easier than others. What we really need to do is to put all the unreasonable people, be they tenant, landlord/landlady, DIL, FIL, SIL or anything else in the Millennium Dome. Think how much easier life would be!

silver - I could be wrong, but I believe there are legal minimums? I assume it's possible to waive them. But for example, I believe (and don't quote me because I am not sure) that it's not legal to rent something out if there is no source of heating - or not on a standard contract. I was told this because we only have one gas fire, and when it goes it will be cold.

I think a lot of the 'expectations' issue is that, if you lived in a house you owned, and something broke after a reasonable amount of use, you'd sigh and accept you had to replace it. Some LL will assume that part of the deal with having a tenant living somewhere as their home, is they'd do the same. But if you're renting and things are on the inventory, you're renting them with a guarantee they'll be in working condition (give or take time to service/repair, obviously).

constance - yay, cat!

I think silver was referring to bad tenants people have had and posted about, rather than tenants posting on this thread, btw?

LRD I hope so!

Also, yes to the no source of heating thing. At our last place the boiler broke for 2 weeks so we had no heating or hot water during that time (thank god there's a shower at work). The contracted boiler repair man from the letting agency told us we were not liable for rent during the period that we had no hot water or heating and should deduct our rent payment as appropriate. Obviously we didn't as the LL was doing everything he could to get it fixed and was being ripped off by said repair man who was just doing some tinkering but didn't actually have a clue.