Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Moved down from the NW many moons ago. Kept a terrace up there with a long term let to a family. Should have cashed in years ago. When vacated had to spend several grand on repairs and a refresh. Couldn't sell so let it through the Estate Agents who also managed the tenancy. Tenants did a runner a week ago leaving rubbish and lost of damage after only 5 months.


What was the point of using an agent? Was the vetting carried out properly? Did they regularly inspect the property. Not getting much sense out of them.


Be interested in hearing good and bad experiences of letting agents. Note this is not in London, rents are a quarter, hence agents have lower income and probably pay for lower caliber of staff. No abuse of BTL landlords please - I've had enough abuse from tenants!

If the rent is paid, and there are no complaints from neighbours or the council, then there would be no reason to inspect the property outside the terms of the lease (usually when re-signing a renewal, for gas check etc).


Otherwise tenants are considered to have the right to privacy and 'quiet enjoyment' of the property, without undue intrusion by the owner or letting agent.


The legal requirement for management of the property should be outlined in the agreement you have with the letting agent.


Sorry you had a bad experience, hope it's sorted quickly. xx

you should check references of previous accommodation, references for ability to pay (check if arrears with previous landlord), take a deposit to cover any damages, undertake regular inspections


Agency would really only provide the tenant (you'd want to check what references they take) and/ or be available for any maintenance, collection of rent - this depends on your agreement and what you're paying them for.


I've also been stung by nasty tenants.

All you need to know about agents is contained in one piece of small print in just about every agreement. That is the bit that says that, even if the tenants fails to pay the rent, you still have to pay the percentage agreed for management.


That's sums up the lack of confidence they have in their own service.

Rosetta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think the best thing is to go for landlord insurance; the company does all the checks on the

> tenants. Join the National Landlord's Association for help.


All the LL insurance I've seen doesn't do any checks. They do, however, demand you do them if you want rent cover.

Thanks all.


It just took me by surprise, having seen a wide range of tenants in the past.


I used to deal with students years ago, having once been one myself I thought that I would know what to expect. Surprised at times, but many of the surprises were good ones.


I hadn't expected this from a 'profesional' person with a kid who'd supplied all the references etc.


As for tenancy agreements and 'quiet enjoyment' I always gave notice of visiting and 99% of the time this was fine. Ho hum.

Too far away to manage reliably. Crappy local estate agents on small time commission + bad tenants is not a good combo. You need to either take greater interest in tenant selection, be involved and meet them yourself or sell the place and cut your losses. You CAN sell it just perhaps not at the price you'd like but there's no shame in taking a hit, licking your wounds and moving on without the hassle of owning it. Then unless you're in negative equity use any gains to pay off your existing mortgage or invest it in an index tracker fund which will likely help you get money back over long term. BTL no longer makes sense with new taxes.


I would just sell it mate and move on.

I don't agree that BTL doesn't make sense with the new taxes, maybe so for newcomers or those poorly leveraged.

Why don't you speak to an accountant and look at your options, find out what the tax implications are if you continue to rent, what your CGT liabilities are if you sold etc...

Hmmmm a quick sum tells me BTL only really works if you have 60%+ equity, a gross yield greater than about 7%, a low BTL mortgage rate and perhaps a corporate structure to run it through. Losing mortgage interest relief is massive for many amateur LL's.

I don't think this is the thread for a boring debate on the impact of BTL in London which has seen a leveraged minority prosper at the expense of the less wealthy, non-property owning masses and widened the gulf yet further between the haves and have nots. And I say that as a former BTL landlord who benefited. My view is that given the impact on society second properties should be more highly taxed and not allowed to be just another asset class like bonds or equities.


Anyway...Malambu...sell that flat in Liverpool bro

Been trying to sell it for two years thanks. Put tenants in as otherwise I'd continue to pay council tax and the place would have got damp. There is only so much of a hit you can take. Surely some of you have kids going to Liverpool to study - here is a great chance to save on rent!


It's a rather sad state of affairs. Some lovely housing stock but depopulation from the 70s coupled with loss of manufacturing has hit hard. Its still a lovely place but many of the middle classes rather than move to the equivalent of East Dulwich would rather move out to Cheshire or the Wirral. BTL and purpose built halls have saturated the student market.


Not after a sympathy vote just explaining that outside of our London bubble the world can be very different.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...