Tenants in serious rent arrears rising

westernpromise

ging84 wrote: »

i never knew there were so many charitable landlords charging rents of just what they need to get by and can simply put thier rents up rather than already charging the maximum the market will support.

So if landlords always charge the maximum the market will support, rents can never have risen in the past, right? There has never been room for rent rises?

Mistermeaner

westernpromise wrote: »

So if landlords always charge the maximum the market will support, rents can never have risen in the past, right? There has never been room for rent rises?

The market capacity to pay can move

westernpromise

Mistermeaner wrote: »

The market capacity to pay can move

Indeed; or the value of renting can rise versus the alternative, which is owning.

Should owning start to look bad value, expect renting to look better. And hence worth paying more for.

Mistermeaner

House ownership is still in part emotionally driven. Pure economic rules don't necessarily always apply

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

ging84 wrote: »

i never knew there were so many charitable landlords .

I never knew there were so many charitable tenants willing to buy a house for their landlords instead of buying a house for themselves.

But the numbers have grown by 2 million since the credit crunch.

Despite buying being cheaper than renting by quite some margin.

Jolly decent of them...

chucknorris

ging84 wrote: »

i never knew there were so many charitable landlords charging rents of just what they need to get by and can simply put thier rents up rather than already charging the maximum the market will support.

We've never charged the maximum rent, and that is over almost a 25 year period, and on a few properties (currently 8, but the average is probably about 5 to 6). It isn't anything to do with charity, there are a number of sound logical reasons:

1. At a change of tenancy work is created, so long staying tenants equate to less work (my longest tenant moved out a few months ago after over 12 years). Our tenants do tend to stay on for quite a few years, we still have two properties with tenants that have been with us over 5 years. Obviously if tenants consider that they are getting a good deal they tend to stay longer, our tenants tend to vacate due to moving in with partners, buying a property, changing job location etc.

2. If you charge the maximum rent your risk of a void is increased, we have never had a rental void, except when we instigate one between tenancies to do certain work (new kitchen, new bathroom suite, redecorate etc.).

3. If you charge below the market rent you have a wider choice of tenant, the landlord/tenant relationship is important, obviously you don't know them that well, but at least with a wider choice of tenant you can be more selective. A good relationship with a tenant tends to mean that the tenants look after the property and do help out by being in for gas safety checks etc. All of our properties are covered by British Gas's Homecare and the tenants tend to call BG themselves when they have a small problem like a sink blocked or a leak from a waste pipe etc.

Although we have recently increased some of our rents, we are still on average almost 10% below the market value, 40% of that 10% difference would be lost on tax anyway, 6% net is IMO a price worth paying.