Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 ··· 6 7 8 9 10 11

Original poster

Tenant requesting reduction in rent

259 replies

TattyCat · 15/02/2018 11:42

Just need to check whether IABU.

Our tenant has rented for around 15 months. A few months ago, she complained of a damp patch in the kitchen, so we've had investigations and this has included knocking plaster off the wall, removing the radiator and applying damp proofing. We are awaiting the plaster drying before the radiator can go back on. Just as a note, the house is REALLY warm and this radiator is one I generally had switched off, or on low when I lived there as the kitchen gets hot.

Anyway, tenant has a dog and a few months ago requested permission for a cat, both of which are fine with us and we've always wanted to be flexible. Tenant is now pushing quite hard for a £50 reduction in rent because of the inconvenience of the work being done (albeit it makes the place better!). This work is costing the equivalent of 2 months rent but clearly, we also want to maintain the property so I don't suppose this is relevant.

IABU in saying 'no'?

OP posts:

givemesteel · 15/02/2018 22:35

Err no - she complained about a problem and you're fixing it. What you're describing is not a major inconvenience, and what would she prefer, that you'd left the damp?

Just go back to her and say that there is nothing in you contract about giving rent reductions for very minor repairs (assuming you used a standard AST). If she keeps pushing ignore messages as you're both bound by the same contract.

londonista · 15/02/2018 23:00

I would say yes because selling a house with a tenant is hard enough without the tenant feeling hard done by.

This month my upstairs neighbour had a flood and it's caused the boiler in my place to fail, I've had plumbers back and forth and am eventually replacing it. All up they will have had off/on heating and hot water for 3 weeks. I'm letting them have £500 off the rent this month because of it, even though none of it was my fault (I am pursuing upstairs for repatriation, obviously).

I don't have to legally but they are good tenants and I want them to stay.

manicmij · 16/02/2018 17:45

You should be increasing her rent as there will be a high need for you to have a deep clean when she moves out due to her pets. YANBU, how does she expect repairs/improvements to be done? The work isn't stopping her from using kitchen she is a trier.

singledadstu · 16/02/2018 17:54

I think you sound decent as far as landlords go. I rent, it’s convenient for me and allows me flexibility should I want to move somewhere else without having to go through the process of selling. Renting is good option for loads of reasons . I would say no to the reduction it’s cheeky if you have told the whole story correctly. However if you are being honest, then I would worry about this tenant becoming more of a twat .

XmasInTintagel · 16/02/2018 18:03

If you do sell with the tenant in situ, you may need to keep a close eye on your solicitor... I sold a house with 3 sitting tenants, in an area where that was a major selling point, but the estate agent kept telling me he was about to issue them notice, then wrote a contract which said there would be 'vacant possession'. If he'd caused them to leave, it would have lost me the sale, but it was hard work stopping him!

Valentinesfart · 16/02/2018 18:06

If she owned her home she would have the inconvenience AND the cost.

Yeah having the inconvenience and no permanent home is great. She's living in a damp house going to get hassled and not asking for much op.

Treacletoots · 16/02/2018 18:06

Oh OP I hear you! Thanks to the government's latest tax on Lls there are so many who are being forced to sell as they don't have a choice...

We are in exactly the same position. Nice 3 bed semi in ok area, we look after the property and even upgrade between tenancies.

We've tried 3 times now to sell a. Once with a tenant in, with their permission, b. Once the tenant agreed to the viewings the left the house like a shit hole intentionally. C. Once between tenancies. But sadly it was Oct Nov time and an empty house in winter is not the best idea!

You're stuck between a rock and a hard place. Try and sell with tenant in situe and it's incredibly unlikely they will keep the house in showhouse condition (which all buyers seem to expect these days) and how could they, it's their home.

Try to sell empty and you've got to pay the mortgage for god knows how many months, and given the sales process is only getting even more convoluted every year, we estimated we would be looking at around 7k in lost income we'd have to find if we sell in even a reasonable time.

Upshot is, from our hard learned experience we've accepted it has to be empty and it has to be immaculate and we just can't afford to sell until our funded childcare hours kick in in around 2 years :/

So, big thanks to the government's new policy, big thank you to Kirsty and Phil (that's just my personal gripe)

Sorry OP. Damned either way. If you find a solution let me know!

daisypond · 16/02/2018 18:15

I think a one-off reduction in rent is reasonable. I can't judge the amount - it depends on the amount of inconvenience and how much rent she normally pays. You've fixed the main issue straight away, which is great, but she had to live with the noise and dust of a damp proof course, knocking back to the brick, replastering. And if she still has to live with bare plaster and an unpainted wall, that needs compensating. The pets are irrelevant to this.

Mix56 · 16/02/2018 18:27

Ho-hum.....so the tenant says a window leaks, you fit it asap...
the drains block, you fix asap, the roof leaks, you fix asap,

You are not a clairvoyant, you don't know what will go wrong & when.
You have accepted she has a cat & dog. (Many wouldn't)
I think she is a CF, & there is no major inconvenience, it's not situation of no hot water & even if this was the case, you fix asap, you are not a GOD,
I really believe she should be grateful you are fixing as soon as you can.

She should not get a £50 reward
As for selling. You can tell her the house is being put on the market & so she is getting notice as obviously this will be a PROBLEM too
See what she comes back with.

Rose87777 · 16/02/2018 18:28

You sound like a fantastic landlord, and I'm afraid she sounds like a CF! X

caringcarer · 16/02/2018 18:29

I have 5 B2L properties and as she is only asking for a £50 a month reduction I would agree to it. You can write it off against tax on self assessment. I would not be agreeing to pets though as they can damage the property and put off potential viewings.

Autumnsparks your LL is breaking the law and you could take them to court and get substantial compensation.

jayne1976 · 16/02/2018 18:47

Just sole with Tennant in situ, if it’s the kind of house that you think many people will want to buy as an investment, then you’ll have buyers.
If you explain you have corrected any issues brought up ASAP and no home is without issues so you can’t give discount I don’t think that is unreasonable.
Whilst she may not want to let viewers in, if you don’t give her her discount, simply advise if that’s the case you’ll have to ask her to move out, or you’re prepared to advertised as Tennant in situ and she can stay under new landlord / lady - her choice - but no discount

katett77 · 16/02/2018 18:49

Some of the comments here about tenants are totally infuriating. As someone who rents with a family, who had a good job and has had two houses sold from under us....the comments on here just reinforce the total snobbery I constantly come up against as a tenant. It’s someone’s home tenant or not!
I think you sound like a very reasonable landlord by the way OP and I wouldn’t expect a reduction in rent but selling from under a tenant is often tricky, so just be open with your tenant, as it sounds like you are.

HaudYerWheeshtBawbag · 16/02/2018 19:01

Its up to yourself OP, your not UR either way, you've done the repairs as required, your under no obligation to reduce rent, however your tenant is under contract to pay you the rent.

Mummyoflittledragon · 16/02/2018 19:12

Lol at the tenant being cheeky or damp proofing an external wall not being an inconvenience. This is structural work to a property, not adding a lick of paint.

Internet photos of examples of internal work.

expatinscotland · 16/02/2018 19:14

'Be aware though, the comment from the pp about the viewings is accurate. Tenants pay for quiet enjoyment of their home, and that includes the last couple of months of the tenancy. The reason it's so contentious is because a lot of landlords, and especially letting agents, seem to think if it's in the contract then it's legally binding. They then get shitty when the tenant would comply to their every whim regarding viewings. '

Oh, yeah, a lot of agents rip the piss with these viewings. They come in with no notice, complain about boxes and stuff being out, expect the tenant to do their job of showing the property, expect the tenant to leave whilst they're their with the viewer.

Gabilan · 16/02/2018 19:23

I really believe she should be grateful you are fixing as soon as you can.

Fixing problems as and when they occur is just a baseline for being a LL. If someone does not want to fix problems promptly, then they can choose not to be a LL. A tenant shouldn't have to be "grateful" that a LL is maintaining a property to the standard that is accepted in the contract and via inspection.

Now to be fair to the OP, she does seem very reasonable. However, some of the other sentiments expressed on here with regard to tenants are just bizarre. Fixing problems with a property does not make you god's gift to the lettings market. It's just what you're meant to do. Don't like it, don't btl.

McTufty · 16/02/2018 19:24

It doesn't matter what a tenancy agreement says about viewings. A tenancy agreement does not trump the law. Its about time landlords and letting agencies stopped using this clause in their agreements. They have no power to enforce it

What do you mean they don't 'trump the law'?

A specialist housing lawyer may correct me, but I'm not aware of any provision which says such clauses are unlawful. If you are a tenant with such a clause in your tenancy agreement, you are acting in breach of contract by refusing reasonable access for viewings.

Your landlord can probably do naff all about it, except serve a section 8 notice on you - but so what if you're leaving anyway. That doesn't make it right to refuse. Getting away with breaching your contract is not th same as not being obliged to do it in the first place. A tenant ought to comply with their obligations under the tenancy same as the LL does.

I was a tenant for 9 years and treated like absolute shit but I would never have refused viewings despite having signed a tenancy to say I would allow them, or asked for a rent reduction for this.

GnotherGnu · 16/02/2018 19:24

It sounds to me as if she's had a fair amount of disruption, given that she's had or will have people in to inspect, do the work and then reinstate the wall and radiator. The work itself is hardly trivial and will have involved a bit of mess and noise. The fact that you did the work quickly isn't relevant, it is what you are supposed to do anyway. I'd say a small reduction is reasonable.

Confusedbeetle · 16/02/2018 19:30

You are doing your best. As a landlord we often give a month free of rent for disruptive work but not a rent reduction

Mummyoflittledragon · 16/02/2018 19:32

McTufty
It’s not that the clauses are unlawful. A letting agent can write any old guff in the tenancy agreement. It doesn’t mean the additional clauses are enforceable or that the tenant has to abide by them.

McTufty · 16/02/2018 19:42

@mummyoflittledragon

What is written in a tenancy agreement is (unless it conflicts with a statutory provision) a contractually binding clause. Why don't tenants have to comply with it? Genuinely confused and interested to know if there is anything at play other than tenants who have signed up to such an agreement deciding to behave like dicks because there'll be no come back on them.

Tenants who deliberately choose to breach the contract will probably get away with it. I accept that. But that's different to saying they don't have to do it in the first place. Lots of landlords don't bother maintaining properties, and they get away with it, doesn't mean it is right for them to have failed to do what they agreed to in the tenancy.

Landlords are expected to do what the tenancy requires of them and so should tenants be.

ExFury · 16/02/2018 19:45

You can only be held in breach of contract if the clause is valid.

Your LL could put in your contract that you have to make them dinner every Monday, but it wouldn't be legally enforceable.

Tenants and landlords have obligations. One of the LL's is to allow the tenant peaceful enjoyment of their home. One of the tenant's is to allow the LL access for essential or emergency repairs and maintenance. Viewings are something that the LL needs to negotiate with the tenant. LA's and LL's just stick it in on the hope tenants don't realise their rights.

McTufty · 16/02/2018 19:49

A clause is valid unless there is a legal reason why not. I'm just asking if anyone knows what that legal reason is or if tenants rely on the lack of effective remedy.

On what legal basis is such a clause invalid?

Mummyoflittledragon · 16/02/2018 19:53

McTufty
I’m no expert. But my understanding is that it’s got to be reasonable and as you say not conflict with statutory provision. So as ExFury says, a clause obliging tenants to allow viewings isn’t enforceable because it conflicts with peaceful enjoyment of their home.

Flip

1 2 ··· 6 7 8 9 10 11