Great ‘How to haggle down rent’ Hunt

matchmade

Gingernutmeg wrote: »

Ultimately, a landlord doesn't have to reduce the rent, or accept a lower rent - if a tenant can't or won't pay the higher rent, then the landlord can end the tenancy at the end of whatever fixed term and find new tenants who will pay what they want. If a landlord doesn't want to accept what a new potential tenant wants to pay for a property, then they don't have to and they can wait for tenants who will pay.

There's no 'forcing' anyone to do anything here, and tenants are hardly 'getting ahead' by getting £20/£30 off the rent each month - it's a very hollow victory when you consider how precarious renting is anyway. That £240/£360 I save in a year probably won't even pay for a removal van the next time I have to move because the landlord wants to sell, or they've been repossessed, or they don't want to be a landlord anymore, or I'm having to move because they won't do repairs ... Please tell me how I'm 'getting ahead' here? And even a one month void is likely to cost a landlord more than that, not to mention the costs of getting a new tenant in a property, and the risk that the new tenant might not be as reliable as the old one ...

Gingernutmeg, I agree that it's a free market :beer: , and tenants have the right to ask for a reduction in rent if they really feel it's too high or they can do better elsewhere. I think what sticks in landlords' throats is when tenants adopt an adversarial attitude and speak to their landlords as if they're always trying to rip them off or are mere seedy Rigsbys. The relationship is naturally prone to conflict, which is why both parties need to respect each other's position and be civil.

Also, the position of landlords is precarious too - interest rates go up and down, it can be impossible to remortgage, workmen can do shoddy work, tenants find an never-ending set of excuses for failing to pay their rent, and they can so easily trash a house, or fail to maintain it properly or keep it clean, or just disappear in the middle of the night without paying a penny. Keeping the "damage deposit" is in most cases a paltry compensation compared with the enormous cost of a rogue tenant. Tenants also don't realise what a fantastic low-cost bargain renting is compared with buying: all the rent usually covers is the mortgage interest and perhaps a bit of maintenance, so the tenant is getting the regular maintenance work, the house insurance, the safety checks, the implied cost of the capital tied up in the house and furniture, the landlord being on call most of the time to solve problems - all of it for free. I've just turned to renting myself in a new area after renting out my owner-occupied property, and talk about an easy life: renting is a doddle compared with the responsibilities and costs of owning your own home.

PayDay

mick_s wrote: »

Thought I'd join to post on this.

We are private LL and do not use an agent. We only have 16 tenants - so not a big landlord.

My suggestion is to ask for a reduction in your rent - if the asking price is too high and you can prove it.

If not expect to be refused and go in the knowledge that you may have wrecked the relationship with your landlord and that any future increases will probably be double of their other tenants until you leave.

This also goes for tenenants that make a lot of contact (had people saying light bulbs have blown) and become a problem - you will not probably be asked to leave but your increases will go up more than others.

The other aspect of this is we have some tenants we get on with really well and their rent has not increased for 7 years.

We normally have one or two change overs a year from 16 tenants - this includes bedsits where we have one that has been there 13 years and one 11 years - so cannot be that bad.

It seems like some landlords are getting very scared over this thread. As landlords we run a business and have to take the rough with the smooth. It's all about supply and demand and now the market is flooded with properties to let, then a wise landlord will reflect that in his rent.

All of this is basic stuff and should have been reflected in your business plan, mick. The days of putting rents higher and higher and threatening to raise rents if tenants dare question the landlords, are gone my friend.

leftieM

We're trying to get our LL to drop the rent from 800 to 700 a month. this may sound cheeky but I never believed it worth 800 to begin with. At the time it was on for 850 and I offered 750 and was told that the previous tenants paid 800 a month. My hands were tied when I heard that. Since then it's emerged that the previous tenants scarpered owing money left right and centre, and the landlord got stung. Also I've seen some much better houses on the market for 800 and houses like our's which are at that level linger for months without being let. I've already found a larger house in a better area on for 900 a month, empty since October, and the EA reckons an offer of 800 would be fair.
So, bottom line, there is an oversupply of family homes in this part of the city. Will the landlord drop our rent to keep his nice, reliable and well behaved tenants or will he take a punt and hope to get a tenant inside a month who will pay a premium rent? We're waiting to hear......

Dinah93

I have rented two properties in the past, I do not rent anymore, I moved back in with my parents, as I hated the uncertainty and the confrontation that came with it.

On my first property I did not ask to get the rent down, what I asked for was a 6 month tennancy instead of the year, as my job might be moving (it did), and for a washing machine to be provided and I would pay the asking price. This was immediately agreed to. This was through an agency. When considering staying on I was told it would be another £75 a month (on a £550 a month one-bed flat) to stay. When I questioned what I thought was a huge price hike in 6 months I was told the mortgage had come to the end of the deal and as it was 100% the landlords hands were tied. I pointed out that there were 7 other flats up for rent in the block, all between £500-£625 (for a two bed with larger balcony), including one next door which was a 3 bed penthouse at only £650 and I was told mine had a better view than the cheaper ones, but they couldn't lower the rent as it would mean they were making a loss. That flat was still untennanted over two years after I moved out.

On my second property I was told it would be £160 a week, which was too much as I had stated on the phone my maximum was £600 per month. So I walked away. Two days later the landlord called me and told me he'd forgotten I had said I could pay monthly, and he would do it for £600 per month if I did a bank transfer each month, so I accepted. This was an established private landlord with over 100 properties in the area I had found by calling everyone under 'residential lettings' in the phone book.

On both of these properties I had frequent problems, hence why I no longer rent. The second one clearly had been refurbished by cowboys, when you used the ensuite shower it rained in the hall, when you emptied the middle floor bath water litterally streamed down the kitchen wall, black mould was growing all over the back wall, eventually spreading to a patch 9ft x 5ft. The electrics sockets on the top floor did not work, and two floorboards were missing on the landing, which had been carpeted over (dangerous to stand on in high heels). There was also an opening in the top bedroom into the roofspace, despite repeated promises this never got a door put on, so we could crawl straight through into next doors house unencumbered (also owned by him, also with no hatch). Sure this wasn't fire or burgular safe! In addition my driveway was used by the landlord and his friends when they were working in one of his shops in the village or boozing in the village pub, meaning I often couldn't park at the house when I came home from work, and had to park nearly a mile away at the supermarket (no on street parking in the village). I had to call on a weekly basis reminding of the problems, wrote over 20 letters over the year I lived there, and only one of the above problems was mended, 11 months after I moved in. Contractors turned up at random, with no prior warning, including one at 10pm on a Sunday night, leaving me little privacy in my own house.

On whether this thread should be here, by and large landlords have at least two properties, their own and one to rent out. This is not a nessessity, this is a luxury, and it is a choice to be a landlord. Like any profit making venture there is risk, but most landlords have chosen to be in this position as they believe it will be to their financial benefit in the long run. To a lesser extent this goes for people who are renting rather than selling at todays prices, they are unwilling to drop the price to sell at what buyers can now afford, or they believe the market will pick up and they would rather rent out until this point. I know this is simplistic and personal circumstances vary, but no one chooses to be a landlord unless they think it is the most financially sensible option avaible to them, eithe to make a profit or to minimise loss.

Many renters have no choice but to rent, they have no fall back, and if they don't meet their rent they are homeless, which is a lot worse than even bankrupcy. Housing is a competative product, I would always bargain when buying a car, likewise I would want to get good value from my landlord, although if I felt the property was below the price of comparable ones in the area I would not barter on the price. My experience of renting has been an extremely powerless one, and while I accept there are good landlords, the growth of cash strapped homeowners choosing to rent out their house for a low margin or a loss is doing nothing to help professional landlords, as tennants find it harder to get things repared because their LL is too skint to do it or put the property up for rent to go work elsewhere in the country, and the relationship between LL and tennant is now more often bad than good.

PayDay

Has anyone mentioned about how low you will be able to get the landlord to drop the rent on an empty property? Empty properties are losing the landlord money and they will be keen to get someone in there and paying rent as soon as they can, especially in the winter when they are having to pay to heat the place too.

matchmade

puffykat2000 wrote: »

We have lived in the same place for nearly 6 years.

In those six years we have only had our boiler checked for safety three times. It was due the year we moved in - we waited until the following Spring before it was done, then it was another year and a half before the next one and this time it was two and a half years before it was done again.

When we spoke to the LL about it - he claimed it wasn't due, although he knew we had our certificate.

Our LL won't do repairs to the property he is obliged to do and the property suffers from damp, the heating system is ancient, the timer on the central heating no longer works, the drainage system needs attention and there is more. Whenever we speak to him we get blamed and he comes round to do a bodge job. He has probably spent £150 on repairs over the course of 6 year. Compared to what we give him (in cash, yes folks he is on a tax dodge as well) this is minor. We give him £6,000 a year to live in our property, times that by six and it is loads.

We would love to move but rents in this neck of the woods are still pricey, there is no way LL would take a reduction request on any property's we view. We can't afford to pay agency fees and we won't get our deposit back because that's the way he is - so we're stuck.

We would like to deal with a LL privately and instead of asking for rent reduction we would ask if we could split the deposit over a few months. Has anyone had any experience of doing this successfully?

If the gas certificate really hasn't been done, that's illegal and you should simply report the LL to Environmental Health. If he's genuinely breaking tax law, report him anonymously to the Inalnd Revenue. If the LL only takes cash, insist on paying from a bank account so you can prove you are paying the rent. If the property suffers from damp, an ancient heating system and so on - well, it's not nice but it's true of many private householders' properties too. Also £6000 a year may sound a lot, but isn't that when you consider the likely cost of the mortgage and the implied cost of the capital tied up in the property (i.e. the amount of money the LL's losing by not being able to use that capital elsewhere). Finally, if other property is more expensive, you are stuck because you're actually paying the cheapest available rent - so you pays your money and you takes your choice.

You don't have to use an agency, you know. Have you tried the classified ads, or www.gumtree.com (Loads of private landlords advertise there)? Most landlords would consider a delayed payment of the deposit, but you need to really nice to them and persuade them that you are going to be a good tenant, because you are a risk for them too.

rentster

We got our rent knocked down by £100/month by offering six months rent in advance. The landlord was happy because he received the lump sum and knew we were going to be there for six months.

We also got a full months rent knocked off by doing some decorating. We stripped, wallpapered and painted the bathroom and re-varnished the front porch. The materials only cost at most £75 and the work only took a couple of days. Again the landlord was happy as he didn't have the time or inclination to do the work himself and he didn't want to pay the cost of a professional painter and decorator.

EagerLearner

Alan_Cross wrote: »

Yep, he's promoting money saving by one section of his membership at the expense of another.

Not the first time he's done this. He has 'previous'.

Hi Alan, I see what you mean but all the money saving tips will affect some section of society (ie: the government could complain about people getting council tax reassessed etc).

I see you did not respond to any of my other points - landlords who are charging a fair rent for their area, and are fair to their tenants, will not have the same risk of an empty property as a landlord who refuses to negotiate.

The landlords would have no qualms whatsoever about increasing rents to go along with local prices, with the tenants having to pay, so for once the situation is reversed. It;s no one's fault - just the current market.

At the end of the day every landlord on here has their idea of whether they would reduce the rent or not and it's a very personal choice, but no one is forced to accept a tenants offer, the same way a tenant is not forced to take a landlords increased rent. The landlord can get another tenant, the tenant can get another landlord.

It's just that in this market, there are more properties than tenants and even as a landlady myself one day, I'd always rather have a bird in the hand than 2 in the bush....

PayDay

matchmade wrote: »

which is why as a landlord I pay for private advertising and do all the maintenance myself, saving the tenant as well as myself a fortune in agency fees - but of course never a word in thanks from the tenant.

Have I missed something here? You expect your tenant to thank you for carrying out your legal obligation in maintaining your properties (an done very cheaply for you)?

Do you phone them up every time they pay the rent and thank them?

You run a business and the tenant is your customer. Like all business, it pays to keep the customer sweet so they stay with you.

Gingernutmeg

matchmade wrote: »

Gingernutmeg, I agree that it's a free market :beer: , and tenants have the right to ask for a reduction in rent if they really feel it's too high or they can do better elsewhere. I think what sticks in landlords' throats is when tenants adopt an adversarial attitude and speak to their landlords as if they're always trying to rip them off or are mere seedy Rigsbys. The relationship is naturally prone to conflict, which is why both parties need to respect each other's position and be civil.

Also, the position of landlords is precarious too - interest rates go up and down, it can be impossible to remortgage, workmen can do shoddy work, tenants find an never-ending set of excuses for failing to pay their rent, and they can so easily trash a house, or fail to maintain it properly or keep it clean, or just disappear in the middle of the night without paying a penny. Keeping the "damage deposit" is in most cases a paltry compensation compared with the enormous cost of a rogue tenant. Tenants also don't realise what a fantastic low-cost bargain renting is compared with buying: all the rent usually covers is the mortgage interest and perhaps a bit of maintenance, so the tenant is getting the regular maintenance work, the house insurance, the safety checks, the implied cost of the capital tied up in the house and furniture, the landlord being on call most of the time to solve problems - all of it for free. I've just turned to renting myself in a new area after renting out my owner-occupied property, and talk about an easy life: renting is a doddle compared with the responsibilities and costs of owning your own home.

And what sticks in my throat is being patronised, or being treated like an idiot or like scum just because I rent. It works both ways. I've been treated extremely badly by landlords and letting agents in the past and yes, I am jaded, but that doesn't mean that I go into every rental assuming that my landlord is out to rip me off or that s/he is the scum of the earth. I've NEVER been a bad tenant, and I resent hugely being treated as though it's obvious that I'm going to be one just because someone else chooses to behave like that. I fully understand that there are bad tenants, but there are some pretty shoddy landlords out there too and in my bitter experience there's very, very little you can do to get any recompense. A landlord has a deposit to keep hold of in the case of a bad tenant, a tenant usually ends up with nothing when there's a bad landlord.

And yes, I do accept that there are some benefits to renting. However, there are also some fairly obvious drawbacks, lack of security being perhaps the main one. I've also been in situations where repairs haven't been done, and where I've been powerless to do anything about it. I have money tied up in furniture, and I loose money every time I have to move as things inevitably get damaged and destroyed.

I don't mean to sound adversarial here, but it really isn't my problem if a landlord isn't making as much money as they'd like from a rental - if a tenant is paying what the market will bear then I can't see how it's the tenant's fault, and if the landlord is charging less than the market rate then that's their business, not mine, and they need to do something about it. If you don't like or don't want the responsibilities that come with being a landlord, then find another way of making money. It's the same with any business - either deal with the legislation and put up with it, and factor those costs into your business strategy, or get out of the business. I'm really not anti-landlord (despite what I sound like lol) but I don't understand why people get into btl and then moan about disliking the legislation, and disliking tenants. If you hate it that much, why do it?