Bastard Landlords Part II

[Archie_tect]

So in 2036, not only have you reclaimed all of your money back that you paid for the property in rent receipts, you still own the property and its substantially increased in value too!!!

No brainer surely!

People who borrow money to buy rental property as an investment are in for a shock, those who have inherited property and then let it out are somewhat more privileged. The rental on a furnished lease has to include for mortgage interest repayments, building and contents insurance, routine external maintenance and decoration, accidental repairs, upgrades on fittings and furniture, major replacements [short and long term] and service costs. What's left of the rental is then taxed as income. The nett residual amount can then be used to reduce the original loan. A rental property loan should work on a return of 10 to 12% but these days this that may generate a theoretical rental that is too high for people to afford to pay so that it's unrealistic. So, Buy To Let loans aren't all they're cracked up to be and though the costs go up, the income won't necessarily match them. It's unlikely that property values will ever increase at the same rate that they have in the last 20 years.

Landlords who don't plan to account for the annual cost of maintenance and replacement are likely to be the ones cutting corners and cheating the system- the ones who tenants find are not upholding their obligations. That's assuming interest rates stay low for the next 20 years!

 

[ttcycle]

ARLA do not register Landlords. They register agents

NLA register Landlords and not Agents

The point being, even if you do have to go through arbitration as the deposit is protected by a society independent of both Agent and Landlord, if you are entitled to it, you will get the money back.

This was the estate agency registered to ARLA who refunded my deposit illegally to the landlord and failed to tell me about the lack of gas and electricity meters and who were intent and pressurising me to put a holding deposit down.

So ARLA where I am means sweet FA in terms of ethical practice.

 

[Dan B]

ARLA do not register Landlords. They register agents

NLA register Landlords and not Agents

The point being, even if you do have to go through arbitration as the deposit is protected by a society independent of both Agent and Landlord, if you are entitled to it, you will get the money back.

Security deposits are required by law to be held by a third party. That's entirely independent of whatever self-"regulatory" bodies the agent or landlord might think looks good on his letterhead

 

[ttcycle]

Security deposits are required by law to be held by a third party. That's entirely independent of whatever self-"regulatory" bodies the agent or landlord might think looks good on his letterhead

Yes, despite this handy piece of legislation, landlord and agent scammed the system as the money I was told by the deposit company should have not been re-imbursed to the landlord in full without me agreeing and okaying the amount.

 

[Dan B]

Yes, I'm agreeing with you. ARLA don't even purport to require any behaviour that the law doesn't require in the first place, and according to your own experience don't even help with that.

 

[ttcycle]

Yes, I'm agreeing with you. ARLA don't even purport to require any behaviour that the law doesn't require in the first place, and according to your own experience don't even help with that.

Yep Dan, I know you're agreeing with me - my post was countering Brains.

It's lucky he seems to take the landlord responsibilities with the care and planning that it entails -sadly, many don't and just think of it as a way to make a quick buck.

 

[benb]

"I have let you use my machine for free so far, I think it is a bit cheeky to expect me to replace it now it is broken, don't you think? I have no objections to you getting rid of it, I don't want it repaired, I think that is fair enough, don't you? If you would like to try and repair it, I have no objections either, and would be happy for you to keep it should you succeed.

For peace's sake I would actually consider buying you one if you had someone with a good offer, say 50-100 pounds, as an offer of goodwill on my part.

Does that sound fair?

Kind regards"

What a self-gratification artist.

 

[dellzeqq]

Blimey! Have you a special deal ?
It costs me the wrong side of a grand each time (plus the cleaning/inventory/preparation ....... call it two to three grand for a new tenant)

yes - I have got a special deal. On the basis of having kept them appreciated and well luvved up.

The flat isn't all that - when I moved in to it in 1995 it was just fine, but it hasn't really had much more than paint, a new shower and new appliances since. I let it unfurnished. That's reflected in the price, but also in the tenants, who are a couple of academics who are more interested in the space than the newness of the kitchen. I consider myself very lucky to have them.

 

[ttcycle]

Back to OT- TC what leverage have you got in terms of the washing machine? That just seems ridiculous and pig ignorant. If it's supplied by them and it breaks, they need to fix it.

 

[dellzeqq]

Landlords don't see things that way.

For your amusement, this is the latest response in what should be a minor matter of repairing or replacing a washing machine. Needless to say, it is a furnished property and the washing machine was provided at the start of the tenancy:

"I have let you use my machine for free so far, I think it is a bit cheeky to expect me to replace it now it is broken, don't you think? I have no objections to you getting rid of it, I don't want it repaired, I think that is fair enough, don't you? If you would like to try and repair it, I have no objections either, and would be happy for you to keep it should you succeed.

For peace's sake I would actually consider buying you one if you had someone with a good offer, say 50-100 pounds, as an offer of goodwill on my part.

Does that sound fair?

Kind regards"

on the other hand you could have this kind of idiot landlord

Agent: New tenant says that the washing machine is bust - it's not draining

Landlord (affecting a worldly wise, nay, lofty disdain for the particulars) : In my experience it's simply not worth bothering to get them fixed. I'll have a new one put in

Landlord orders new washing machine from Co-op, to be delivered next day

(fade, continuity shot, landlord cycling across London on Brompton)

Landlord arrives just as new washing machine is installed

Delivery Driver: I've got the old washing machine in the van, but there's nothing wrong with it

Landlord: It wasn't draining

Delivery Driver: You wouldn't drain if you had half a woolly jumper in your drain pipe. Once I cleaned it out, it worked perfectly.

Landlord (feeling slightly foolish): Oh. Can I have it back then?

Delivery Driver: Sorry, sunshine, it's already in the van - anyway, you'd only get a tenner for it. I'll get fifty.

Landlord (aside): Now is the winter of our discontent etc., etc., etc.......

 

[dellzeqq]

Back to OT- TC what leverage have you got in terms of the washing machine? That just seems ridiculous and pig ignorant. If it's supplied by them and it breaks, they need to fix it.

My understanding (but please read post above to get an idea of the breadth of that understanding) is that if it is in the inventory then it should work.

 

[Brains]

Security deposits are required by law to be held by a third party. That's entirely independent of whatever self-"regulatory" bodies the agent or landlord might think looks good on his letterhead

AFAIK there are only 3 options to protect deposits;
One run by the government (which is mostly used by councils and Housing assoc's),
one run in association with the NLA called MyDeposits which is mostly used by the private sector landlords,
and one run in association with ARLA which is mostly used by Agents

They all use the same arbitration process and all do much the same thing, the only difference between them is where the actual deposit sits after it has been paid and who keeps the massive interest the monies accrue in a top paying account (all 0.025% of it)

 

[dellzeqq]

Security deposits are required by law to be held by a third party. That's entirely independent of whatever self-"regulatory" bodies the agent or landlord might think looks good on his letterhead

that's my understanding as well

 

[ttcycle]

My understanding (but please read post above to get an idea of the breadth of that understanding) is that if it is in the inventory then it should work.

yes, if all was above the law and there wasn't a feckless git involved I'm sure.

But in times where it is the landlord's responsibility and despite this they're not repairing or replacing...where's the muscle etc

 

[dellzeqq]

yes, if all was above the law and there wasn't a feckless git involved I'm sure.

But in times where it is the landlord's responsibility and despite this they're not repairing or replacing...where's the muscle etc

I take your point entirely.

To go back to something Dan wrote - it is fair to say that in London the landlord really has considerable bargaining power because rents are going up and up and up. Big time landlords are expanding, and making a fortune. From the point of view of the amateur landlord this offers a different kind of opportunity - take a lower rent than you might be offered, but choose the tenant carefully. And here's where the agent comes in......agents sometimes have a bit of an agenda - tenant moves on after twelve months, agent gets fee. So, really the landlord has to find an agent that is prepared to buy in to the longer term. What my agent said to me is 'if you like them, then reduce the rent for the second and subsequent years'. That makes sense to me...........