Letting out a property - furnished or unfurnished ?

TroubledLandlord

Hello,

I have always let properties out as "furnished" in the past as I was advised by a family member that it made eviction easier.

Having read through the section 21 notices etc, it doesn't seem to make any difference if the house is furnished or not ?

Is there any benefits to furnished or unfurnished ? It seems to me that furnished is more of a risk because you are liable if the furniture isn't fire resistant etc etc ?

bifold

TroubledLandlord wrote: »

Hello,

I have always let properties out as "furnished" in the past as I was advised by a family member that it made eviction easier.

Having read through the section 21 notices etc, it doesn't seem to make any difference if the house is furnished or not ?

Is there any benefits to furnished or unfurnished ? It seems to me that furnished is more of a risk because you are liable if the furniture isn't fire resistant etc etc ?

I only let properties out unfurnished with only a cooker and fridge freezer,this keeps the upkeep costs down and in my area the rental is the same for furnished/unfurnished.

theartfullodger

TroubledLandlord wrote: »

...........
Is there any benefits to furnished or unfurnished ? It seems to me that furnished is more of a risk because you are liable if the furniture isn't fire resistant etc etc ?

err... what landlord would not ensure fire-regs complaint furniture.... (Sigh..)

Think three points...

a) Advertising it as furnished/unfurnished gives you a wider selection of prospective tenants, but can confuse some (if someone wants furnished a trip to IKEA....).
b) Furnished allows 10% of rent as expense - easier accounting (perhaps...)
c) Furnished - more bother wen probs with furnishings...

Cheers!

Lady_strange

I personally wouldn't rent a furnished property. That puts me off when looking for properties to rent.

Mind_the_Gap

To some extent it will depend on your target tenants.

Students will always want furnished. A young couple/family looking to rent for a few years will probably prefer unfurnished. Young professionals may prefer partly-furnished.

Werdnal

I have always let my flat unfurnished, and in 10 years have never had any problem getting tenants.

If unfurnished, you also get the benefit of up to 6 months council tax relief if you have voids in letting.

Remember, it is wise to PAT test any electrical appliances you supply.

Benji

Werdnal wrote: »

Remember, it is wise to PAT test any electrical appliances you supply.

PAT only applies to 'portable' appliances - so fine if it's a toaster, irrelevant if it is a fridge or washing machine.

G_M

TroubledLandlord wrote: »

Hello,

I have always let properties out as "furnished" in the past as I was advised by a family member that it made eviction easier.

Is there any benefits to furnished or unfurnished ? It seems to me that furnished is more of a risk because you are liable if the furniture isn't fire resistant etc etc ?

Grandad? The law on eviction differentiating furnished/unfurnished changed many years ago!

The most worrying aspect of your post is that
a) you are clearly getting poor, out-of-date advice and
b) you have clearly gone into letting property without learning how to do it.

You need to find some more reliable sources of information about your rights and obligations as a LL, about the sensible precautions to take etc.

And you need to make use of those sources to learn for yourself what is involved.

Start here and check out the links/sources at the bottom.

franklee

Surely it's a case of know your market. What tenants are you wanting to appeal to and what is it they want?

Family homes round here do better unfurnished. I would have thought the two bed flat market would too. However now many kitchens have fitted appliances I'd expect them to be provided as they are a pain to move and the slots come in varying sizes. If you're leaving standard with gaps for freestanding appliances then it's not so bad for the tenant to provide their own.

I skip any advertised as furnished or unfurnished as I've read too many cases where that's agent speak and the landlord turns out to be reluctant to remove and store their stuff.

thegirlintheattic

I agree that it depends on your target market - furnished properties only really appeal to first-time renters and students, the vast majority of other tenants have their own furniture and want to keep it. You also losing people simply because they don't like your choice of furniture, and cut down on your expenses.

You might want to go half-way and provide white goods - but then you have to consider repair costs.

Matt1977

As a tenant I would always go for unfurnished - but with the white goods included.

I have come accross a lot of funished rentals that resemble the interior of a nursing home. I guess by the those who have inherited property but are not keen to sell in the current climate and don't know what to do with the furniture still inside. Like this reasonably priced one:



http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-34259393.html

I believe most tenants would prefer to use their own furniture anyway. I certainly would. It would be a damage limitation exercise in what landlords can deduct from the damage deposit after the tenancy ends as the furniture is not their property.