Great ‘How to haggle down rent’ Hunt

barnaby-bear

rentster wrote: »

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.

This can be VERY RISKY.

If the LL is repossessed you may have no rights to stay and only choice is to pursue LL for the rent through the courts, if you can find them/if they have any assets to pursue. The tenancy is between the LL and the tenant not the mortgage company and especially if there was no permission to let you can be out on your ear very quickly. LLs in financial distress most likely to like this idea.

Additionally a LL who has the cash in hand may have little incentive to do repairs and you can't arrange repairs and deduct from the rent (which you can do if you take proper advice and warn in advance etc).

Mr_Matey

Moneysaving is nearly always "at the expense" of someone.

I get a shirt for 50% off, not so great for the shopkeep.
Cheaper houses, not so great for the vendors/estate agents.
Cheaper rent, not so great for the landlord.

The landlords on here are like many have pointed out, obviously very scared and want to censor good money-saving tips for renters. Tough luck I say, this is a free forum and I commend Martin's tips on negotiating on rent. I'll even underline this with a few freaky spinning heads.
:money: :money: :money:

franklee

stphnstevey wrote: »

the majority of landlords only have a few properties at most. Lot's of ordinary people have turned to renting as they can't sell in this climate and they would go under otherwise. The days when landlords had whellbarrows full of money are well and truly over. There has been a new breed of ordinary people that have been forced into renting or lose thousands of pounds and go into vast debt.

What I object to is using a recession (that is effecting everyone, landlords and tenants alike) to stand on someone else to get ahead.

Do you think tenants have wheelbarrows of money then, so that they can afford to pay over market rents to bail out property owners and landlords with small portfolios who have enjoyed one heck of a boom in house prices these last few years. (Did any property owner even those with just a small portfolio give a second thought to tenants while they were counting their equity from the biggest boom in house prices ever?)

Having been prudent by not buying and putting up with being a tenant, knowing prices were unsustainable by any reasonable salary multiple whist watching even the government do all they could to keep then inflated, I've now seen my deposit trashed by low interest rates, the government still doing all it can to prop up unsustainable house prices, redundancies everywhere (that affect tenants too) as the greed of the housing boom turns to bust and now to cap it all you want me to overpay on the rent?

The house market is a market, it goes up, it does down. Rents are a related market, they go up and they go down.

The house owners I feel sorry for are the first time buyers who purchased after the ill advised interest rate cut in August 2005. That re-ignited the boom dragging even more people into taking on unsustainable debt. Any other property owner should have built enough equity by now to ride the storm, well at least that's what the mantra on this forum was a few years ago put forward by the doesn't matter if prices go down as you are in it for the Long term brigade.

stevetodd

PayDay wrote: »

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.

Yes you missed the "agency fees" what he is saying that he saves the tenant agency fees, such as credit check fees (although this might also be charged), contract signing fee (what on earth is that all about?), inventory fees etc that letting agents charge tenants, also some of the fee that the letting agent charges the landlord will end up being an extra on the rent. I too manage my own properties, obviously I don't expect any thanks for it, I do flag this up though when I advertise, ie that the tenants wil save money on fees.

Alan_Cross

MSE_Martin wrote: »

Hi Alan

Sorry you feel that way. By your argument though I should close the site down. Cheap credit cards hit those who work for card companies, cheap contact lenses opticians, cheap flights holidays.

This is a consumer website, not an investor website, and always has been. I have written many times how people often play for both sides. There are many good investor sites which will give advice for landlords - its not something that I've ever written about or covered - its not what this site does.

Tenants are consumers. Landlords may be consumers in other roles, but not in their landlord role. There are some great sites out there supporting landlords and I wish you and them the best - but its not what MoneySaving is about.

It's also worth noting that in any deal the landlord has the ability to say no... and not accept a price they dont want to. There's no aim to steal, force, or do anything unethical hear just to ensure people are getting a good deal on their housing, as we aim to show them how to get a good deal on anything else.

I've now answered your point, and won't comment again in this thread, as it needs to return to its original purpose and would ask that you don't discuss it within this thread.

Kind regards

Martin

Martin

All of which neatly - and probably intentionally - sidesteps the issue that buy-to-let is NOT a business for a very large pecentage of those who have engaged in it.

When we are talking rent levels, Martin, you know very well that we are talking sources of income and not capital gain. It is dishonest of anyone to suggest otherwise. Your point about 'investment' is a total red herring - have a word with HMRC and see whether they classify income from rented property as a capital gain from selling an investment.

Many people, and very often of quite modest means (I personally know many buy-to-letters who are financially worse off than your average tenant), have decided to 'buy' this 'consumer product' as an alternative to putting their money into private pensions or savings schemes. These people are often seeking to establish an income for their retirement as much as anything else...

... and here you are, busily encouraging tenants to rebel...

Martin, I think you have realised belatedly that you have failed to think matters through and have, in effect, weighed in yet again on behalf of one set of consumers against another... and are trying unconvincingly to pretend otherwise.

Very sad.

leftieM

Alan_Cross wrote: »

All of which neatly - and probably intentionally - sidesteps the issue that buy-to-let is NOT a business for a very large pecentage of those who have engaged in it.

If it's not a business, in that it's an activity that people are engaged in to make money, then what on earth is it?
It's not the problem of the tenants if rents are falling because of oversupply. As others have said, if a landlord doesn't want to lower the rent they can let the tenant go and take a chance in getting another tenant who will pay what they want.

PayDay

Alan_Cross wrote: »

All of which neatly - and probably intentionally - sidesteps the issue that buy-to-let is NOT a business for a very large pecentage of those who have engaged in it.

Becoming a landlord is a business and a business that has a lot of responsibilities. Like any other business, it has it ups and downs.

There is an oversupply of rentals and tenants should take full advantage of that in these hard financial times.

You really can't expect other people to shore up the gaps in your pension fund.

barnaby-bear

Alan_Cross wrote: »

All of which neatly - and probably intentionally - sidesteps the issue that buy-to-let is NOT a business for a very large pecentage of those who have engaged in it.

Oh sorry I didn't realise this was a site about subsidising other peoples ropey business models.... must go out and support all basket-case business plans - like those shops run by blonde 40somethings selling shabby chic painted flower pots and novelty kitchenwear.... amature BTLers with vanity property portfolios etc....

mystic_trev

At the end of the day it's supply and demand. There are (in many places) far to much supply. In that case tennants (or prospective Tennants) dictate the cost of rents, and if Landlords don't like it, too bad, tennants will go alsewhere and find somewhere cheaper.

I've been a Landord for over 12 years, long before the the recent BTL Landlords (it's me Pension innit!) arrived. Look after your Tennants and charge the correct rentals. They're the ones paying the rent and if you don't treat them right, they'll go elsewhere, end of story!

pilchardthecat

stphnstevey wrote: »

I am fine with moneysaving when only a multi million dollar company loses a few pounds, but landlords are only human ... blah

This thread just stinks of robbing one moneysaver to benefit another ....blah

What utter garbage.

Extending this argument - millions of people's pension funds are invested in shares in those big companies, so you saving money on your gas bill/optician/broadband is reducing corporate profits, and hence dividends, and thus you are all ultimately stealing from my pension.