If you were a landlord, would you consider this?

[TreatTreat]

I viewed the most perfect property for me. I've now been told the landlord wants it to be let as furnished. I have all my own furniture and the furniture in the house isn't my style.

The agent is going to speak to the LL about potentially letting it out as unfurnished. If you were a LL would you consider this? I'm so desperate to secure this lovely property.

It sounds as if the LL wants to return to live there so if you are looking for a long let you can probably forget it.

Unfurnished is much less hassle as if anything breaks etc the LL is responsible for replacing it.

Do you know if the agent will be managing the property because in our experience the agents dissuades the LL from letting the property furnished.

It’s a business.
Everything has a cost, and the cost is passed to the customer.

I would put it in storage but pass the fee to you in higher rent.
I would consider allowing you to put it in storage as long as I was given assurances the storage was good enough and you had adequate insurance.

One of you will have to sell furniture or put it in storage.

I don't think the landlord will be bothered if you don't take the property, he'll find someone else who won't give him work to do .

Probably not, as it would end up meaning costs for me to store the other furniture, but it doesn't hurt to ask the question. Hopefully the landlord in your case won't mind.

They will say take the house as it is or leave it, probably. Although my previous landlord agreed to remove kitchen crockery from the property as I had all my own stuff. But that's very different to a house full of furniture.

Thank you. The furniture is really old fashioned, so I'm wondering if it may have belonged to an older family member and have sentimental value.

It depends on who else had enquired and what type of property it was - it would be annoying having to furnish it again at the end of a short term if that’s what tenants in that area typically wanted.

This was me. When I let my house furnished it’s because we were abroad on a 2 year stint and wanted the furniture on return and didn’t want to have to pay storage. If something got broken so be it, still cheaper than storage and could potentially come out of the deposit presuming that it was actual breakage not wear and tear. We ended up letting to a loose friend who was saving for a deposit also with a roughly 2 year timescale so worked out perfectly and they’d come from a houseshare so owned almost nothing. So no I wouldn’t have agreed to chuck or store my stuff and let it unfurnished and I agree it’s potentially a sign the LL doesn’t want a long term tenant.

I was a tenant in this situation and removed everything I didn’t like, put in storage & returned it. She never even knew

God Don’t rent it

You said yourself it’s old, you’ll suddenly find yourself losing your deposit because of a scratch which has been there since 1973

Think about it like this - the landlord wants to store furniture in a house you are paying for

nah

It would really depend, it's worth seeing if you can come to an arrangement.

If the property has sentimental value to the ll, they might be motivated to rent to someone who really loves it.

I can rent properties instantly they become available and I would have no need to consider your request which would cause me totally unnecessary hassle and expense. That sounds quite harsh but that's about the sum if it.
Conversely, if the LL is having difficulty finding tenants, they may consider your request. There's no harm in asking.

Hmm. I was told to always let unfurnished, which kind of surprised me, having rented properties already furnished as a youngster. Now, however, I think most people have their own stuff so don’t want extra/furnished. Ask the agent if the ll will remove the furniture, I think it’s pretty unusual these days.

Yes, I would. I've been told that unfurnished properties are more popular now, so I would definitely consider it. However, clearly it depends on whether the landlord is attached to the furniture.

Probably not op because someone will take it furnished so why would they want the hassle of removal and storage fees.

What's the property like overall? If the house belonged to an elderly relative of the landlord's and they're renting it out as it is without any attempt to modernise or consider what might appeal to tenants then avoid!
At best they've been a cheapskate and cleared out their Granny's house to furnish their buy to let. Either way it's not a good sign.

Yes, this is the way to go I think. Landlords are being squeezed and rental properties are highly sought after now, they don’t want the hassle and cost of having to remove and store a houseful of furniture.

It’ll only get worse with the EPC reforms and new renters rights.

If it really is the perfect place for you then offer to pay the storage costs for the LL furniture?

Ask the question.

I am a landlord. There are tax implications / benefits to letting furnished so it is possible that the landlord has put furniture in to achieve this and is ambivalent to whether it stays or not.

I’m a landlord. It’s worth asking.

I’d probably accommodate it but maybe for a slightly higher rent to make up for having to get rid of it.

I imagine the LL would have an issue as they would have to find somewhere to store it.

I prefer to let unfurnished for this reason. But I have a similar issue if I move into another rental as they almost all have their own white goods and I have my own.

I doubt it. Moving the furniture out of the property and storage until you decide to leave is energy, time and expense for the LL.

I’m a landlord and couldn’t face the hassle of moving furniture around. I don’t struggle to let my property so I wouldn’t consider it.