I am a new landlord - dilemma - please help!

Innys1

Wyndham wrote: »

I lived apart from my husband for awhile. I was working away from home and renting a flat. just in my name, not both, and to be honest, my marital status wasn't my landlords business. I wasn't there at weekends much, but some weekends there were two of us - again, no one's business but ours.

BUT.... if he'd died, I would have honoured my commitment on the rent (he didn't, and we now live together full time, but if....!)

You're right, it isn't the landlord's business - UNTIL it's being used as an excuse to terminate a contract early.

For me, the story sounds highly unlikely and I suspect the tenant's dogs are the real reason he wants to leave.

If the property was in demand, I would have no issue with terminating the tenancy early. If not, and there was the possibility of a void period, I'd refuse the request - just my view.

Wyndham

Innys1 wrote: »

You're right, it isn't the landlord's business - UNTIL it's being used as an excuse to terminate a contract early.

You obviously didn't read my post to the end. I said IF it happened, I would honour the rent......

Innys1

Wyndham wrote: »

You obviously didn't read my post to the end. I said IF it happened, I would honour the rent......

I did read your post to the end. We aren't talking about you, we're talking about the OP's tenant so what you would do is, largely, immaterial.

franklee

"The house is in a rural area, and has so far not been quick/easy to rent out. "

...

"Of course under the circumstances, I would love to cut him some slack, but him leaving early will land me with extra expenses until i find a replacement (which I can't afford!)"

...

"He had recently asked me if he could bring his 2 dogs to live in the house (rental contract does not allow for this and I said no)"

Leaving aside the issue of the tenant's wife the above statements don't sound great. The tenant's contract only has another two months to run in any case so you would need to afford the extra expenses of finding a replacement then anyway. Why not have a rethink on the dogs issue as it's a rural property after all and that will give you access to loads of tenants who will have been turned away from all the other no dog properties. I'd suggest you offer the current tenant he needs to pay rent until the replacement tenant starts. If you can't find a replacement within a month then I'd be asking if letting that property with low backup funds is the right business to be in.

Lord_Baltimore

You have an unhappy tenant; let him go. Things like this can escalate and it isn't worth your while. There may come a time when you might gladly pay 2 months rent to get rid of him.

macman

What is 'reasonable' is a decision only you can make. In law he is bound to pay for the remaining 2 months and to give you a month's notice.
At the very least, if you allow him to void the tenancy within minimum term, he should give you the month's notice, without which you will clearly be taking a loss on the rental income. His circumstances may have changed, but that does not mean you have to pick up the bill.

ognum

Lord_Baltimore wrote: »

You have an unhappy tenant; let him go. Things like this can escalate and it isn't worth your while. There may come a time when you might gladly pay 2 months rent to get rid of him.

I 100% agree with this.

As a LL if someone asks to go even if they are in a fixed contract I let them go. I really do not want unhappy tenants who may then disrespect the property. Even if I lose income I let them go.

Go and talk to the tenant in person, arrange to remarked the property with viewings as and when you want in exchange for a release from the contract, if they want to go now let them go. In the long run it will work out better for you.

The key to stress free landlordship ( is that a word) is having content and happy tenants. Content tenants will allow the LL some slack when things go pear shaped and will really help with contractors and repairs etc.

Let the guy go, look for someone who wants to be there!

Errata

Is it worth the aggravation? Tell him to buqqer off, keep his deposit and take the hit of losing one month's rent - which you may easily make up by increasing the rent for the next tenant.

ognum

Errata wrote: »

Is it worth the aggravation? Tell him to buqqer off, keep his deposit and take the hit of losing one month's rent - which you may easily make up by increasing the rent for the next tenant.

Tenant has only been there 4 months so no evidence that rent will rise.

AleMrsT

Tell him that if you can find a new tenant to take over his tenancy ASAP the you will release him, and deal with the deposit as it needs to be dealt with.
His tough luck on this one I'm afraid, he signed for six months, he is legally obliged to honour it (as you would be expected to do so). You can be fair and make the offer of him paying no more rent and you keeping the deposit AFTER you have checked the house out to make sure there are no dilapidations, as you could be even further out of pocket.