How much to raise rent?

owitemisermusa

Snooze wrote: »

Unless your tenants are mugs, if you increase the rent by £125 pcm they'll be out of the door like a shot, regardless of the fact you've found one other property being advertised for more (and I say that as both a former tenant and a former landlord).

The fact that you "forgot" to put the rent up at all for the past 2 years won't be seen as a good enough reason by the tenants and I'm afraid that your options are now limited. I think a £25 increase pcm on the current price is acceptable; you might even get away with £50 but I think you'd be taking a huge risk. Speaking with my former tenant hat on, I'd seriously be looking elsewhere if you announced a £50 pcm rise on £1625.

As you haven't announced to us any increase in costs to yourself then presumably they're still the same so you're only wanting to put the price up out of greed. Speaking with my former landlord hat on, I think you'd be foolish to increase it at all given the fact that you have - by your own admission - excellent tenants. As a landlord, getting good tenants is the second biggest challenge after getting the rent money out of them - why risk all this for the sake of a few extra quid?

Your choice...

Rob

I think the word greed is all too readily bandied about. Everyone's using it, appears to be all the rage. It shouldn't be used lightly or it will lose all meaning.

Why on earth do people think that it's only business costs that may inform rent rises? How else does one cope with everything else going up?

After all, the OP still has to shop for food and clothing, buy petrol etc. Heck, my monthly taxes seem to have crept up. Even those who are sillily (sic) using the word greed would think nothing of raising rates/fees to cover a downturn in the economy or personal fortune.

Lay off please.

Poppy9

Your problem is that all costs are rising at the moment, especially utility bills, fuel, food etc. and people are feeling the pinch.

Also you have a HMO. It'll only take one of the tenants to say they can't afford their share of the rise to be the deciding factor in them all moving out if they moved in as a group. If you've let to 4 independent tenants then one moving out means the other 3 have to pick up a greater share of bills.

Snooze

owitemisermusa wrote: »

I think the word greed is all too readily bandied about. Everyone's using it, appears to be all the rage. It shouldn't be used lightly or it will lose all meaning.

Why on earth do people think that it's only business costs that may inform rent rises? How else does one cope with everything else going up?

After all, the OP still has to shop for food and clothing, buy petrol etc. Heck, my monthly taxes seem to have crept up. Even those who are sillily (sic) using the word greed would think nothing of raising rates/fees to cover a downturn in the economy or personal fortune.

Lay off please.

The key word being business. :rolleyes: That is, if you are no longer providing something that your customer (in this case tenant) is happy with then they'll take their business elsewhere.

Regardless of your ranting about my use of the word greed, it is exactly that. There is simply no justification to suddenly slap a £150 increase pcm on top of the current price.

There's a very fine balance between keeping good tenants and increasing the rent and sticking 10% on is not the way to do it!

When I was a landlord I learnt this the hard way, pretty much by adopting a feet-first approach of announcing the increase and then worrying about filling the empty property later :rolleyes: only then to find myself with high-maintenance tenants who "cost" me more in time sorting out their whinging about anything and everything than the increase in rent covered :rolleyes: . You soon learn that good tenants who keep their head down and look after themselves (and your house) are worth their weight in gold and in fact it wouldn't be the first time that I've put the rent down in order to keep them! Now there's something for you to chew on!

I must say that I find it rather strange that a supposedly experienced LL of 23 years (the OP's claim) is seemingly unaware of "how it works" and is needing to ask such basic questions on an internet forum .

Rob

carolt

You don't say where you are in S. London, but that sounds a lot to me. Other than checking your street, have you done a rightmove search of all the properties in your area? Unless one of the tenants have a very specific need eg school catchment areas, disabled and need to be able to walk to work (not exactly very common!) etc, they'd be looking at whatever else was suitable and cheaper within a much wider area, and if they were even thinking of moving, it would give them a kick up the backside to find somewhere cheaper/better.

It would also be likely to create a feeling of resentment.

But it's your call, obviously.

Let us know how it goes.

MissMoneypenny

pickles110564 wrote: »

I would then wait a couple of months and send the boys round to get the money you owed.

The problem with that is that you don't know if the tenant has bigger boys than yours. You could very well find yourself having to move out of your own home very quickly.

PasturesNew

Innys wrote: »

As there are four tenants I understand it does not fall under the terms of the Housing Act 2004, see HMO licensing section in:

http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/Home/EnvironmentandTransport/EnvironmentalServices/hmos.htm

Whether it does or not depends on the make up of the tenants.

From your link:
"A dwelling is an HMO if it is occupied by more than one household and amenities are shared" - so if I move in with my mate, we're two households. If we bring 2 more mates in, that's four households.

Requiring a license is a different level of complexity in the mix. It is likely you don't need a mandatory license, but the property is still an HMO. Whether it did or not would depend on the number of storeys + number of people + number of households. As you've 4, it would indicate on first looking that you wouldn't need a mandatory license.

MissMoneypenny

Innys wrote: »

As there are four tenants I understand it does not fall under the terms of the Housing Act 2004, see HMO licensing section in:

http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/Home/EnvironmentandTransport/EnvironmentalServices/hmos.htm

From the link you have gave

"A dwelling is an HMO if it is occupied by more than one household and amenities are shared."

What made you think you didn't have to comply with HMO regulations?

MissMoneypenny

Sorry PN. I said the same as you, nearly:D

MissMoneypenny

PasturesNew wrote: »

As you've 4, it would indicate on first looking that you wouldn't need a mandatory license.

Don't these LLs still need to do things like installing hard wired smoke alarms?

PasturesNew

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

Don't these LLs still need to do things like installing hard wired smoke alarms?

They need some modifications etc.
Without knowing the actual make up of his tenancy/s and property layout, I'd not even start looking into what though.