Making an Offer on Rental Property

angrypirate

We are looking for somewhere to rent in west london and have seen a property we quite like. What would be a sensible offer as a percentage of the original asking offer? We would be leaving the landlord with a 2 week void (not that bad i would have thought) so we were thinking of going in at 15% under and seeing what happens

Also, this property is through a letting agency. I have done a land reg search on the property and got the details for the landlord. Can i ask the landlords out there, how would you feel if a tenant contacted you directly finding out your details in this way (avoiding using the agency)? It could potentially be a money saver for both parties, but my girlfriend thinks this is stalker-ish and could freak out the landlord.

silvercar

You don't know whether the landlord has employed the agent on a "find and manage basis" or "finder only".

If its find and manage there would be no gain and possibly iritation at going direct. If its a find only service, then the landlord may be delighted.

jyonda

The landlord uses the agancy because they do not wish to mange the property themselves which is why they pay the agent so no they're not likely to want to deal direct. The landlord also uses the agent to get the best price possible for the property without dreaded void periods so the price should already be around what the market will bear. In my experience, you can try to knock off 50 Quid a month but that's about it.

angrypirate

silvercar wrote: »

You don't know whether the landlord has employed the agent on a "find and manage basis" or "finder only".

If its find and manage there would be no gain and possibly iritation at going direct. If its a find only service, then the landlord may be delighted.

We are refering to properties that agencies have on a finders only basis. Obvisouly if the agency is employed on a mange basis then it would be pointless (should have stated this in the original post)

The LA has already told us that the LL would accept possibly as low as 265 pw (down from 280pw) which represents barely 5% off asking. I know agency fees for finders service to the LLs can be as much as 10 - 15% per month on the rent (from a reliable source - a former LL). My thought was contacting the LL direct and offering £240pw.

silvercar

I don't know how you would know which properties are managed and which are not.

The problem is that a low offer will mean that the landlord will be persuaded by the agent that they can get more for the property. If a agent convinces a landlord they can get him 280 than that means the landlord receiving 238-252. Your offer of 240 is hardly worth upsetting an agent (that might be useful in the future).

Pee

If you contacted me to say you wanted to rent my house at a reduced rate on what the agent was offering I'd think you were hard up, couldn't pass a credit check, devious, underhand and oddly enough, I wouldn't choose to let to you.

Of course, if my overheads were higher or I cared less about the property... but surely they would risk a longer void for a better rent.

becky_rtw

Pee that doesnt apply in London atm - theres sooooo much choice because lots of people cant sell and prices are sinking - especially where I live. For example I pay £800 a month a for a room and when I took the place it was the cheapest thing by far - now I could rent a studio flat in the same street for £650 a month - shame I cant afford moving costs and a new deposit

Offer what you think its worth - they can only say no and you can decide to leave it or go back with another offer - but I'd think twice about cutting out the agent - they usually have rules on because you found it through them the LL would still have to pay the finders fee!

Thrugelmir

silvercar wrote: »

The problem is that a low offer will mean that the landlord will be persuaded by the agent that they can get more for the property. If a agent convinces a landlord they can get him 280 than that means the landlord receiving 238-252. Your offer of 240 is hardly worth upsetting an agent (that might be useful in the future).

Agreed. As for a higher gross rent before fees the LL probably has no hassle!

You would need to offer something to make it worthwhile for the LL to consider.

angrypirate

Pee wrote: »

If you contacted me to say you wanted to rent my house at a reduced rate on what the agent was offering I'd think you were hard up, couldn't pass a credit check, devious, underhand and oddly enough, I wouldn't choose to let to you.

Of course, if my overheads were higher or I cared less about the property... but surely they would risk a longer void for a better rent.

Thank you for letting me know your thoughts. But, I must say, if thats your opinion, than you arent a very good judge of character. I would say that is probably a better description of most estate agents I have met

I have little respect for most estate agents (most of them are clueless, no qualifications and dont understand what is happening in the economy) and I loathe having to pay them £150 for a credit check and photocopying their useless generic contract which is full of crap that wouldnt stand up in court (my partner is a trainee lawyer).

I also loathe my rent being 5-10% higher because they are pocketing it for doing absolutely nothing (im referring to typical LA charge on unmanaged property) other than collecting the rent and then forwarding it to the landlord.

And 5 - 10% on a £1100 a month on a 1 bedroom shoebox flat is a significant amount of money.

Im simply looking at ways to cut out the middleman and save money - something what this forum is all about.

Jowo_2

angrypirate wrote: »

I have little respect for most estate agents (most of them are clueless, no qualifications and dont understand what is happening in the economy) and I loathe having to pay them £150 for a credit check and photocopying their useless generic contract which is full of crap that wouldnt stand up in court (my partner is a trainee lawyer).

I also loathe my rent being 5-10% higher because they are pocketing it for doing absolutely nothing (im referring to typical LA charge on unmanaged property) other than collecting the rent and then forwarding it to the landlord.

And 5 - 10% on a £1100 a month on a 1 bedroom shoebox flat is a significant amount of money.

Im simply looking at ways to cut out the middleman and save money - something what this forum is all about.

Your frustrations with letting agents is understandable and are similarly shared by some landlords. However, landlords may be contractually obliged to accept tenants found by the agent.

In addition, it is generally accepted that a minority of rogue tenants actively seek out private landlords in the hope that their tenant screening process is weak, who deliberately try and find an accidental or naive landlord. Therefore, it is the preference of some landlords to use agents as gatekeepers, knowing that it deters bad tenants from applying.

All a property can command is market rent which puts tenants in a bargaining position when the market is flooded - they do not raise the rent by 10-15% to accommodate the charges levied by the agent.

Good luck with your rent negotiations.

tbs624

Pee wrote: »

If you contacted me to say you wanted to rent my house at a reduced rate on what the agent was offering I'd think you were hard up, couldn't pass a credit check, devious, underhand and oddly enough, I wouldn't choose to let to you...

If you're that judgemental maybe most would prefer not to let from you? It's not only LAs who can run credit checks, and the OP hasn't indicated he's not willing to be subject to one

Pee wrote: »

Of course, if my overheads were higher or I cared less about the property... but surely they would risk a longer void for a better rent.

Wouldn't a void of less than two months end up costing the LL more than taking the OPs offer for a 12 month contract?

You could always say to the LL that you would be happy to deal direct or with the LA, but that the max you are willing to offer is £xxxx. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.....