Renting out my property: Private rent or use an agent?

sooz

Join a landlord's association.

I use the NLA - they'll give you all the advice you need, keep you informed about all the regulations, and the changes to the regulations, and their membership fee is tax deductable.

A_Nice_Englishman

mlz1413 wrote: »

A Nice Englishman,

a question raised by your post about being responsible for tenants behaviour, if you use an agent does that responsiblity fall to them? or to the property owner?

Thanks
MLZ

I'm not a lawyer and haven't kept up with the latest developments as I am no longer in that business, but I think a landlord would ultimately be responsible for most things even if he employed an agent.

alison999

i prefer to rent direct from a landlord. that way you hear everything from the horses mouth, also the letting agents i have used seemed useless.

WeirdoMagnet

We prefer to rent from a landlord direct. Agents (IMO) don't care about you as the tenant - they don't care that your central heating has failed, that the freezer broke down etc etc. They just act as a go-between between the tenant and the landlord.

I didn't know that the landlord is responsible for their tenants anti-social behaviour. Is that a new law? In about 2000/2001 we had terrible problems with our next door neighbours who were renting the propery - late night parties, drug taking, letting their dogs use our garden as a toilet etc etc - no one (not even the police) could do anything! :mad:

We're looking for a rented property at the moment, and would prefer to rent direct from the landlord, although obviously we won't rule out agents. The only tip I would have is keep things straigtforward for the tenant - one potential house/landlord we visited were talking about a potential fence negotiation with new neighbours whilst they would be travelling in Europe, and wanted some bills paid directly into their account for them to pay. That was pretty off-putting for us!

HTH,

Georgie

daisyroots_2

When we let our first property 15 years ago, we decided to use a Letting Agent to start, and once we'd got the hang of it, we'd do it ourselves. The LA we chose is small and local, run by a (then!) young couple, and they have been so helpful and efficient, we have stayed with them and let all our properties through them, although we manage them ourselves. Why ?

- they keep us up to date on legislation, HMO's, deposits, CORGIs, etc.
- before we buy a new property for rental he comes to view it with us and advises whether it will be easy to let
- they hold keys for all our properties, so tradesmen can collect the keys from them during working hours, which saves us a lot of trouble
- they find tenants, take up references, ensure tenants sign the AST Agreement, hand keys to tenants, explain to tenants the finer points of the law, deposits, etc.
- one of them always answers the phone, no 19 year old morons and no need to explain every time. If you use an Estate Agent, who does a few lettings on the side, you get a different person every time you call, and they never know what you're talking about.

If, for any reason, our Letting Agents closed, we'd go it alone now. So, if there's a small, local Letting (not Estate) Agent near you, give them a try. If not, try going it alone - the big chains are not worth the hassle and they charge like a wounded bull.

sandieb

This is a very interesting thread.

We are thinking of letting out a 2-bedroomed house and are going to try a small local letting agent initially as we are new to this.

We are undecided as to whether to offer it part-furnished or unfurnished. I understand "furnished" would mean a potential 10% wear and tear tax allowance on the furnishings and unfurnished would mean that no council tax payable if empty? Is this correct and any opinions as to the best option? Part-furnished for us would be leather sofa/chair (currently in house), dining furniture, cooker and new washing machine.

Also we are about to re-decorate and I'm wondering about wood laminate for the main living room floor for durability as opposed to new carpet? (Separate question for a separate thread!)

Do we leave the lawnmower for the tenants' use?

I guess I need to visit the letting agents asap.

sooz

Unfurnished would normally have white goods & a cooker in, so really you are only offering a sofa, chair, dining table & chairs. Do you have fitted wardrobes? I would offer it as unfurnished or part-furnished, and see what people want. Don't move stuff out yet.

As for flooring, wood is usually preferred, but make sure it's the hardest wearing stuff you can afford, and is laid well. If getting a new carpet, choose a dark neutral colour (biscuit/beige etc) rather than white or cream.

Certainly leave a lawnmower if you want them to mow the lawn.

sandieb

Thanks sooz!

daisyroots_2

Different areas have different preferences regarding furnished and unfurnished. In our London flats, the preference was always for furnished, but over the years tenants are wanting less and less, just white goods, wardrobes and beds - sometimes they bring their own beds. Our London tenants are mostly young professional sharers. For good tenants with decent references, we will comply with what they want.

But in Devon, where we have a cottage and our son in law has two more, the market is almost exclusively for unfurnished but with white goods. This is another area where a small, local LA can advise - s/he will know the local market.

Another thing - I have never let to smokers.

sooz

Ditto no smokers!

Ask a local agent what's preferred - furnished or unfurnished -in your area, or look in the local ads.

In some of my flats, I find people want less and less furniture, but those with small stairways and the second floor, well I mostly furnish them, as every tenant bringing in their own sofa and bed and wardrobe would cause huge amounts of damage to the walls on the way up, and down again.