A Question for Landlords

macgirl

Can I ask how picky Landlords are? ie: smokers, DSS and pet owners?

Hope I don't get shouted down here (I know I'm probably asking for it) but I've seen properties advertised saying this, I don't know if it's being too narrow minded by stipulating a particular type of tenant.

Any thoughts gratefully accepted
Cheers, Mac

clutton_2

as a LL i dont like pets... i have had a lot of expense which is rarely covered by the deposit, as dogs chewed skirting boards, scratched doors, urinated on parquet floors, etc etc. Smokers - as long as tenants get all drapes dry cleaned at the end of the tenancy i dont mind... but they rarely do.

i do take DSS tenants.

thegirlintheattic

Most places round here are no dss, no smokers, no students, no pets, no sharers.

theartfullodger

Only specified, small, pets : took 5 months to get rid of pong of not-permitted dog (repainted, new carpet, new furniture - still smelt.

Specify "no smoking in property " (you can't state "no smokers ").

I subscribe to the Scottish core standards for landlords which do not permit discrimination against benefit claiments. (What, child benefit, OAP pension, working tax credit, DLA?).

Any Landlord claiming they can't have DSS because of insurance is simply too mean & lazy to change their insurance.

Cheers!

nollag2006

Definitely no pets, no smokers, or DSS.

The rental market in London is so bouyant in London at the moment, that you don't need to take on this sort of hassle.

Pet and smokers really smell out the place, and can put off future purchasers or tenants.

DSS have the additional risk of non-payment, and rarely look after the place well

Why take the risk?

clutton_2

if you dont take DSS then how do you know they ""rarely look after the place well"

i have had professional tenants, benefit tenants, sick, and pensioner tenants and some do, and some dont, look after the place well.. you simply cannot generalise

Turnbull2000

No pets, no smoking and no children seems to be the way to go. Demand is massively outstripping supply, so landlords can be choosy. Letting your tenants fall onto a rolling contract can allow more effective enforcement of these rules, as you can issue an immediate 2 months notice to quit. Oh, but do ensure you have regular inspections written into their contract, otherwise you'll not know what they're up to in your property.

macgirl

Thanks for all the responses. It kind of backs up our thoughts. Our first tenant (a working, non-smoker without pets) has just moved out after a year and was near perfect, paid on time and left the place spotless.

The house has been back on the market for 3 weeks and so far has had 4 potential applicants (DSS, pitbull owners, students or those with bad credit). Our views are aligned with nollag, but I take clutton's point that it's wrong and prejudiced to dismiss DSS.

We're not in London, but the LA said they are short on stock and everything is letting really quickly. Our instinct is to wait for the right tenant, but I don't want us to cut our nose and have 2 void months because we're being too picky.
The only difference is that last time I did all the viewings as we still lived there, but this time the LA has done them all. Would I be better doing them in order to "sell" the house and get a head's up on the people viewing (and so I'm not a faceless LL) - or is it better to be detached?

sarahevie

I'd go for no tenants over bad tenants anyday.

Two months of voids is a lot better than 9 months going through the court system to get them out