My landlord wants ro raise the rent

franklee

stevetodd wrote: »

When I send the contracts for my prospective tenant's perusal (after taking a holding deposit, usually about 2-4 weeks before they move in) I usually state in the covering letter that the rent will rise annually in line with inflation at the end of the 12 month contract and quote an approximate percentage (usually 3%). That way everyone knows where they stand, doing things verbally just leaves room for misunderstandings.

I can feel comments coming, the answer is YES I have had occassion to not increase the rent due to market conditions, NO I have never reduced it. YES I have stuck to that approximate 3% even when rents have shot up above that level (but stated so and indicated there would be a 'catch up' rise the following year).

stevetodd wrote: »

The thing is though I have never had a rental void (other than a self imposed one which was necessary to refurbish or sell a property) and that is from 1991 to present day holding 3-5 properties.

Have any other landlords in London suffered voids or not? I attribute my lack of voids to:
a) Buying the right property in the first place (ie good quality near transport)
b) Not over charging on the rent, I much prefer to slightly be under the market value, which allows me a wider choice of tenant, some tenants have stayed with me for 6 years, often 3 years.
c) Maintaining the property to a good standard
d) Mintaining a good relationship with tenants (where possible)
e) Making sure I choose the right tenant, I have often refused 'gazumpers' in favour of my selected tenant, once I have set the rent my focus is on getting good tenants not trying to screw a few extra quid out of them. I never forget that they are occupying (looking after) my investment
f) Redecoration and renewal of good quality furniture/white goods when required

Afterall it's a very long term investment who wants the hassle, surely it's better to have a peaceful life.

I'm not too sure how you've managed to keep the rent slightly under the market value and yet still raise it circa. 3% most years? Perhaps London is a special case but I thought rents hadn't risen that much. Certainly my rent has been the same for three years, if anything rents here are now falling as there has been a big increase in supply of properties.

Where I am now was empty for two months before I moved in. That's not unusual, some overpriced tat has been empty six months or more.

I agree with the rest of your post, a landlord behaving like that would keep me interested in staying if he was delivering such a good service.

Codswallop

Rents aren't falling everywhere, in some small pockets of London, workers don't want to commute and yet they can't afford a mortgage/or don't want a mortgage if they're here from overseas. Consequently it's pushing the level of demand for rented property higher and the prices have risen accordingly.

If you don't like what the landlord is charging, give him written notice and look elsewhere. As others have said, always, always, communicate important agreements with contracts and in writing. Never just assume anything.

tbs624

franklee wrote: »

A days old rent 9600/365=26.30
A year's new rent 840*12=10080
Increase over the whole year 10080-9600=480

Which is 480/26.30=18.25 days.

So a void of more than 18 days and the landlord would start losing! That's before the costs, hassle and uncertainty to the landlord of changing tenants.

Good to see that you got your calculator out but you’re making some simplistic calculations there Franklee . What constitutes a real loss (ie one that might worry a LL) , and at what stage, depends on other factors too - number of properties owned, expenditure, tax rate applicable, rent potential etc . It may actually suit the LL's financial/business structuring that year to have a short void, or at the every least be nothing more than a minor irritation in the grand scheme of things.

You also, of course, need to look at the other side of all of this -for the tenant, trying to fend off paying an extra £480pa to the current LL, that amount could soon be swallowed up in the hassle & uncertainty of finding a new property, the costs of getting “credit checked” again, paying “admin fees”, inventory check in fees, (plus maybe also a check-out fee on the current property), tenancy agreement fee, et al. The tenant will also need to pay out a new tenancy deposit & rent upfront for the new property before getting back their deposit from the current tenancy.

Maybe there have been detrimental changes to the tenant’s income since they last got checked, which wouldn’t be known about by the current LL (or cared about so long as the rent is paid in full & on time) but it may mean that they’d not qualify for a property at similar rent elsewhere?

Then there’s the cost of the removal van itself, plus a day off work maybe, and the uncertainty of starting over with a new LA/LL who may turn out to be less reliable than your current one on repairs & maintenance issues? Or they could be a newbie “reluctant LL” who will maybe need to sell from under the tenant’s feet or even end of up with the property repossessed in a few month’s time?

Maybe the new property is further away from work, has additional cost of resident parking scheme = increased costs there?

Despite what you note in your own area, there are some pockets of the country, and a certain types/standards of rental property, that will always have strong demand. Never mind your hypothetical £480 increase- if you as the current tenant decide to leave, the LL may find that he can re-advertise with a bigger overall increase to a brand new tenant. They may even have one lined up already, and not all new tenants need to serve out notice somewhere else.

Tenants should first check that any notice of rent increase they have been given is properly dated,and in line with any rent mechanism within their original contract, and then aim to talk direct to the LL. It's always possible that a compromise can be reached: it may, for example, be that the LL would welcome a new FT with either no rent increase ( or a reduced one) being in place.

Like so much of the rest of the LL& T relationship, rent increases are an area best dealt with by friendly negotiation, rather than a stand off leading to a situation where either party is left feeling that the other is “pushing their luck”.

franklee

tbs624, I was simply asking where you got the one to two months from in "Most will only need a month or two's void to effectively wipe out the equivalent of the potential gain from a proposed rent increase". Clearly 18.25 days void wipes out a 5% rent increase when taken over a year. So on what basis do you refer to a month or two's void? (that wipe out increases of 8.2% and 16.4%). Obviously that's rent only, not other costs incurred.

franklee

As for fees to the tenant, the agent I use charges 100 quid for everything for two tenants, no renewal fees. Then I'd have to find removal costs. These vary from tenant to tenant but a van isn't that expensive to hire. Of more hassle is all the cleaning and sorting out the bills/post/paperwork.

The rest of your post could go either way as for all you know the new property could be better than the old, that's for each individual case to weigh up taking all costs associated with the property into account. I'm not in London so accept that may be different but there has been an avalanche of rental properties coming on the market here, currently on rightmove there are three times the usual number. Many I'd be happy to pay the same as here for as they are better located or better properties, but I'm still tied in here ATM. Certainly am considering going periodic to keep options open this time

In another area I watch on rightmove, my old home, there used to none for rent within half a mile (3 or so within a mile), now there are 18 (55 within a mile), yet that's a quiet residential area with little history of renting. May of these are still not let.

If a landlord chooses to ignore this market activity and insist on a rent rise then I think he does seriously risk losing his tenants in the current market.

Nottsguy2007

boggie40 wrote: »

landlords do have a right to raise rents, but there is a way to go about it.

you have 2 choices really if the landlord will not budge.
you can either stay and pay the increased rent, or look for another dwelling in the same price bracket that you have been paying.

is it really worth all the stress this is causing you...

Hey ya.

I have only just noticed your post - thank you.

You are right about the stress - its actually making me ill to the point that I had to visit my doctor today and he is appalled.

I'm also afraid that I do not have any choices other than to fight against the increase.

I do not have the money to pay the new rent, nither can I get it. I have no savings or access to money to pay for a move to a new home let alone a damage deposit.

It would quite litterally put me out on the street, i would become homeless, loose my benifits and most importantly my support network. It is not an overstatement to say that it will ruin my life.

I, on one hand, have the official rent officer telling me that rents are falling especially in my area and that my landlord can not justify any rise in rent, and then it seems that I now have some posters arguing in favor of my landlord so I am now more confused than ever. I am on the verge of putting on my coat, walking out and just leaving my house as it is because I really do not need the hassle and with out clear advice and support I can not mentally deal with this.

I dont know what to do...,..

Gorgeous_George

You have choices and YOU need to take control. A little assertiveness can go a long way.

Your choices are:
1. Say ok, I'll pay.
2. Negotiate. Either a lower increase, a decrease(!) or an improved service for your extra payments. ( I really like 'negotiate').
3. Take the huff and walk.

I don't like 1. or 3. but guess what, 2. appeals to me. Be strong, do some research (into other prices etc.) and then ask to meet with your LL. Point out that you have been a good payer, that you have looked after the property. Show him the better or cheaper properties that are available.

Negotiate a deal that you are happy with.

If negotiation fails, decide if 1. or 3. is the better option for your own circumstances. No 1. means you stay without the hassle of moving. No 3. means your LL will potentially have a void. However, from a LL's point of view, it may be worth losing a week because a 3% rise is a 3% rise forever.

You must decide what is best for you and remember NEGOTIATE FROM STRENGTH. Do your research and go in there armed.

GG