You think you've got damp?

Doozergirl

tbs624 wrote: »

LLs don't buy and let property for anything other than that, whatever end of the market they are in. They may spout about how they are "providing accommodation to those in need" but there is no altruism there.

So you're agreeing with me then? I'm not suggesting that they do it out of altruism, I am saying that there is no excuse for buying substandard property which is being sold off cheap because of the issues and then putting a sticky plaster over the cracks in order to fool prospective tenants. That is making a quick buck based on having no standards for their tenants at all and taking every penny for themselves with disregard for the property even - it's all about the rent, not even the long term viability of the property!

Presumably Poppysarah's friend wouldn't have taken the property in the first place if there were mushrooms growing in it at the first viewing

theartfullodger

She's never seen the gas safety certificate but was told one is on file ...

Hmmnnn... b***ocks... see...
http://www.hse.gov.uk/gas/domestic/faqlandlord.htm
in particular...

You must keep a record of the safety check for 2 years and issue a copy to each existing tenant within 28 days of the check being completed and issue a copy to any new tenants before they move in.

This LL needs a right good kickin'

Cheers!

Lodger (a Landlord...)

tbs624

Doozergirl wrote: »

So you're agreeing with me then? I'm not suggesting that they do it out of altruism, I am saying that there is no excuse for buying substandard property which is being sold off cheap because of the issues and then putting a sticky plaster over the cracks in order to fool prospective tenants. That is making a quick buck based on having no standards for their tenants at all and taking every penny for themselves with disregard for the property even - it's all about the rent, not even the long term viability of the property!

The part I agreed with was:

tbs624 wrote:

I agree with you that anyone buying up property should ensure that a decent standard is reached before offering it out for rental.

However, calm down and look back at the first sentence on your original post, to which I was specifically responding

"It's such a risk renting a property when you see the number of landlords that are simply in it for a buck"

My point was that *all* LLs are effectively "in it for a buck". You're happy to let to your relative, but clearly wouldn't do so if there wasn't a kickback for you personally.

You've now clarified that you specifically meant "quick buck":D

Doozergirl

tbs624 wrote: »

The part I agreed with was:

However, calm down and look back at the first sentence on your original post, to which I was specifically responding

"It's such a risk renting a property when you see the number of landlords that are simply in it for a buck"

My point was that *all* LLs are effectively "in it for a buck". You're happy to let to your relative, but clearly wouldn't do so if there wasn't a kickback for you personally.

You've now clarified that you specifically meant "quick buck":D

Yes of course I meant quick buck. I didn't realise you were being a smart ar5e by highlighting how stupid I am by thinking Landlords were doing it for altruistic reasons. As if you couldn't draw what I meant from everything else I'd written.

What a pointless conversation. :rolleyes:

poppysarah

Her landlord has sent some plasterers to come round and quote for replastering...

so I'm wondering if he's planning on replastering the visible bit, getting her out and putting new tenants in whilst it all looks shiny and new...

Plastering won't solve the problem until the damp source is found...