Landlord's perspective 12 month or 6 months + is this reasonable?

onthehorizon

Hi there,
We are letting out our lovely property and found a tenant to move in. The tenant seems nice and very on top of things - which is a good sign as we don't want hopeless tenants that don't understand their obligations.  Her preference is for a 12 month fixed term tenancy with no break clause - but this only came out at the time of the viewings when I suggested we have a break clause at six months.  At the time of the viewings, I explained that I was relatively flexible but suggested she go away and think about whether that is something she really wants.  At the time, I considered a 12 month fixed term to be beneficial from our perspective as we have the comfort of having a tenant in the property for a generous minimum term, although of course things could go horribly wrong.
She passed the referencing checks, although not strictly with 'flying colours' in the sense that the report indicated she was medium risk but I think it was because of her length of employment as there weren't any serious red flags like CCJs or non-payment of rent at current address.  We prepared a tenancy agreement granting her wish of a 12 month fixed term with no break clause AND making a concession about the move in date being three weeks later than we had budgeted for but added some bespoke clauses in the contract that were pretty uncontroversial but offered some further protection to us (e.g. making things in the template a bit clearer and adding a few further controls about the condition of the property).  We hadn't expected these to be an issue but she has queried every single one of them and asking for them to be removed and now we're worried she's going to be difficult throughout the tenancy and we don't want to give the impression at the outset of the tenancy that we just roll over at every junction for her.
We are sure she would treat the property well and pay the rent on time, but we are now nervous about granting an absolute fixed term of 12 months and understand from other sources that it would be much more sensible / common to offer 6 months fixed term followed by periodic.  Is that true?  We necessarily want to lose her as a tenant as we think she is responsible, but we think it would be best to suggest a shorter initial fixed term.  No contract has been signed as yet because she is waiting to hear back from us on her problems with the contract - would going back and suggesting a shorter fixed term be a poor thing to do from a relationship perspective?  Could we just frame it as having reflected since viewings and the referencing and the issues about the contract, we think in the round it would be better for all parties to have an initial fixed term of six months - we have no intention of kicking you out at 6 months but there is too much risk on us at this time.
Sorry for the long post - we are trying my best to get up to speed with everything we need to know as landlords and are pretty much there after several months of work but sometimes gut instinct / emotions get the better of us. 
Thanks,
OTH 

Comms69

First time landlord im guessing?

1: The referencing check may as well be a magic 8 ball, it has no relevance to anything actually tangible. (e.g. non-payment of rent at current address.  - there's no way for anyone to accurately check this)

2: added some bespoke clauses in the contract that were pretty uncontroversial but offered some further protection to us (e.g. making things in the template a bit clearer and adding a few further controls about the condition of the property). - So things that are totally unenforceable. Excellent. 

3: The length of the tenancy from your perspective is largely irrelevant. 6 months or 12. The eviction will take the same length of time, 6 months plus. ( - we have no intention of kicking you out at 6 months but there is too much risk on us at this time. - you cant, anyway... )

4: Tenant has in effect 1 obligation, you have several dozen. If i was the tenant, i'd be concerned you have so little experience with this

Stubod

When we first let out our property we actually wanted the "security" of a 12 month contract. Similar to you, nice tenants, (they had sold their house and wanted somewhere to move into while they looked). As it happened they only slept in the place for a few weeks as they found somewhere else to live very quickly.

However as per their contract they paid everything up to the point we found another tenant which actually only took a couple of weeks. As we were with an agent at the time they strongly recommended going with a 6 month contract to start with which we did, but after the first 6 months the tenant wanted to change to 12 monthly for their own piece of mind, (not that we would have asked them to leave anyway).3 years on with no problems and they are now on a rolling tenancy....

...so I guess it's up to you. 6 months is the "safe" option, but if you feel comfortable with them then go straight in for 12 months if that's what they want?

Morbier

My immediate reaction to your post is that you are too emotionally involved in your 'lovely' property. It's a business transaction and such emotions should have no bearing on your decisions. If you were 100% happy with this prospective tenant, you wouldn't have written this post. You are the LL, it is your property - therefore you set the terms of the tenancy agreement (assuming they are legal and generally acceptable) and then find a tenant.  This tenant can't be the only one interested surely?

I write this as a long-term renter. Perhaps a LL will have a different point of view. 

onthehorizon

Comms69 said:

First time landlord im guessing?

1: The referencing check may as well be a magic 8 ball, it has no relevance to anything actually tangible. (e.g. non-payment of rent at current address.  - there's no way for anyone to accurately check this)

2: added some bespoke clauses in the contract that were pretty uncontroversial but offered some further protection to us (e.g. making things in the template a bit clearer and adding a few further controls about the condition of the property). - So things that are totally unenforceable. Excellent. 

3: The length of the tenancy from your perspective is largely irrelevant. 6 months or 12. The eviction will take the same length of time, 6 months plus. ( - we have no intention of kicking you out at 6 months but there is too much risk on us at this time. - you cant, anyway... )

4: Tenant has in effect 1 obligation, you have several dozen. If i was the tenant, i'd be concerned you have so little experience with this

Only unenforceable if the terms are unfair.  They were weren't. Your post is very rude and patronising. 

SpiderLegs

onthehorizon said:

Comms69 said:

First time landlord im guessing?

1: The referencing check may as well be a magic 8 ball, it has no relevance to anything actually tangible. (e.g. non-payment of rent at current address.  - there's no way for anyone to accurately check this)

2: added some bespoke clauses in the contract that were pretty uncontroversial but offered some further protection to us (e.g. making things in the template a bit clearer and adding a few further controls about the condition of the property). - So things that are totally unenforceable. Excellent. 

3: The length of the tenancy from your perspective is largely irrelevant. 6 months or 12. The eviction will take the same length of time, 6 months plus. ( - we have no intention of kicking you out at 6 months but there is too much risk on us at this time. - you cant, anyway... )

4: Tenant has in effect 1 obligation, you have several dozen. If i was the tenant, i'd be concerned you have so little experience with this

Only unenforceable if the terms are unfair.  They were weren't. Your post is very rude and patronising. 

I wouldn’t get too hung up on that response tbh, as it’s mostly drivel.

The actual question to ask (ask, comms69, not assume...) is what these clauses actually are, seeing as they seem to be the stumbling block.

steampowered

What are the additional terms you have added which are causing a problem, if you don't mind me asking?

If you started with a good professionally drafted tenancy agreement, there should be no reason to change it. It would have been drafted that way for good reason, and would likely already give the landlord the maximum protection that is possible under the law. It is very unlikely that you - as a non-legally qualified first time landlord - would have good reason to try and "improve" the template.

Tenants have a good reason for getting upset about new clauses about the "condition of the property". Lots of landlords search for any reason they can to retain the deposit. Perhaps the tenant is concerned that you might try and rely on these "new" unusual clauses to retain the deposit.

In reality, there is very little difference between a 6 and 12 month tenancy. A 6 month break clause does not mean that you can kick out the tenant after 6 months. In reality, if you want to evict a tenant who doesn't want to live, you are going to need to issue a s21 notice - which takes months - and then potentially go to court - which also takes months. 12 month tenancies are totally standard so I think you will come across as unreasonable if you now try to ask for a 6 month break.

Comms69

onthehorizon said:

Comms69 said:

First time landlord im guessing?

1: The referencing check may as well be a magic 8 ball, it has no relevance to anything actually tangible. (e.g. non-payment of rent at current address.  - there's no way for anyone to accurately check this)

2: added some bespoke clauses in the contract that were pretty uncontroversial but offered some further protection to us (e.g. making things in the template a bit clearer and adding a few further controls about the condition of the property). - So things that are totally unenforceable. Excellent. 

3: The length of the tenancy from your perspective is largely irrelevant. 6 months or 12. The eviction will take the same length of time, 6 months plus. ( - we have no intention of kicking you out at 6 months but there is too much risk on us at this time. - you cant, anyway... )

4: Tenant has in effect 1 obligation, you have several dozen. If i was the tenant, i'd be concerned you have so little experience with this

Only unenforceable if the terms are unfair.  They were weren't. Your post is very rude and patronising. 

Why don’t you post the terms and let others advise you on their enforceability. 

I suspect it’s things like keeping it in a certain condition - which is unenforceable. You’re a landlord, not their parent. 

Comms69

SpiderLegs said:

onthehorizon said:

Comms69 said:

First time landlord im guessing?

1: The referencing check may as well be a magic 8 ball, it has no relevance to anything actually tangible. (e.g. non-payment of rent at current address.  - there's no way for anyone to accurately check this)

2: added some bespoke clauses in the contract that were pretty uncontroversial but offered some further protection to us (e.g. making things in the template a bit clearer and adding a few further controls about the condition of the property). - So things that are totally unenforceable. Excellent. 

3: The length of the tenancy from your perspective is largely irrelevant. 6 months or 12. The eviction will take the same length of time, 6 months plus. ( - we have no intention of kicking you out at 6 months but there is too much risk on us at this time. - you cant, anyway... )

4: Tenant has in effect 1 obligation, you have several dozen. If i was the tenant, i'd be concerned you have so little experience with this

Only unenforceable if the terms are unfair.  They were weren't. Your post is very rude and patronising. 

I wouldn’t get too hung up on that response tbh, as it’s mostly drivel.

The actual question to ask (ask, comms69, not assume...) is what these clauses actually are, seeing as they seem to be the stumbling block.

I have done just that. I’d be happy to put a small bet to charity that they’re unenforceable - £5. Charity of choosing, username as reference? 

GHolmesAdmin

Wouldn't it be nice if landlords were most concerned about what is best for the tenant?

[Deleted User]

The tenancy agreement I use is from RLA and if a new tenant started querying it I would know that it is a legally sound draft.
I am stuggling to understand the need to add clauses about the condition of the property, surely these should be there from the outset.
What are the clauses?