Hi all, I live in London which means getting a good flat is difficult. Generally, you have put a deposit down on a place during the first viewing or within about an hour to have any hope of getting it, if it's half decent. Although this has slowed a little in the past 6 months, the landlords still hold the higher ground with ease and it gives you very little time to protect yourself from getting a dodgy place. I have been lucky and had no problems with landlords in the 6 years I've been in London however I have heard some extremely irritating stories of negligence and/or lying about a property just to get it let. With the high price of rents especially, I think this is completely unacceptable. How about, then, mutual deposits. A tenant pays a deposit in order to protect the landlord from damage, wrong doing etc. so my shouldn't the tenant have protection from laziness and poor service that impacts their life? The idea is that all deposits sit in a secure deposit scheme where any deductions have to be approved through a trusted 3rd party. For example my friend rented a flat that had a missing window with a poor non permanent replacement in place with the promise that it will be fixed. 6 months of complaining and nothing but high energy bills because it leaks so much heat. It even voids the contract as the house is not secure. Taking them to court is out of the question for such a low amount. In general, we should have better access to hold landlords accountable.
In London you take what you're given basically. They know that the demand will always be there (though its tapering off slightly), so they can treat hopeful tennants like dirt to get what they want. I've seen a flat the morning its gone on the market, handed over a holding deposit, only to have it sent back 24hr later (well 5 days later because Knight Frank are useless) because someone else came along and offered £20 a week more. The key with the actual flat is to request the inventory photos once its been completed - I believe they have to legally oblige with this, and to also take your own on day one, and then submit any issues directly to the agent. If its something that occurs during the tenancy, you've just got to lean on the agents until they get it done.
Sadly not, I'm not exactly sure on the legalities of renting in the UK because as it's a sellers market, or should that be landlord, whatever it's highly skewed in the landlords favor so if they think a tenant is to much hassle they probably have another 50+ tenants to choose from, what governmental guidance there is all very wooly and boils down to you can ask but don't expect anything as the landlord can evict you for no reason.
I think by law now deposits have to be held in an account and returned with the interest. We certainly did when we rented our house. Some good tenants, some not so. Unfortunately we used a management agency, who returned the deposit, even though there's stuff we've had to pay for - damaged walls with holes in them and broken furntiure for example. Didn't find out till we returned to the house. It works both ways and i've been both. A tenant fancies not paying rent, good luck being a landlord trying to get them out and/or your money back. That said there's then landlords who charge a fortune for shoddy housing. Once had a landlord not return our deposit for made up reasons. Take them to small claims court, easy and simple to do - we got our money back pretty quickly.
Huh, I didn't know there was a lot of Londoners here, nice! Yeah I privately rent at present and tbh I am dreading dealing with a letting agency. My landlord currently is really good, and will answer the phone and come and fix stuff instantly so yeah its not the norm.
I rent out a few properties and the deposit, by law, has to be held in a 3rd party escrow (tenancy deposit scheme). Failing that a fine of up to 3 times the deposit can be applied. This is under Scottish law, not sure if it’s the same in England. At the end of the tenancy, if there is a dispute, the landlord has to prove there is a justification for retaining a sum from the deposit.
Your landlord must put your deposit in a government-backed tenancy deposit scheme (TDP) if you rent your home on an assured shorthold tenancy that started after 6 April 2007. In England and Wales your deposit can be registered with: Deposit Protection Service MyDeposits - including deposits that were held by Capita Tenancy Deposit Scheme If you don’t rent your home on an assured shorthold tenancy, your landlord can accept valuable items (for example a car or watch) as a deposit instead of money. The items won’t be protected by a scheme. There are separate TDP schemes in Scotland and Northern Ireland. They make sure you’ll get your deposit back if you: meet the terms of your tenancy agreement don’t damage the property pay your rent and bills Your landlord or letting agent must put your deposit in the scheme within 30 days of getting it. At the end of your tenancy Your landlord must return your deposit within 10 days of you both agreeing how much you’ll get back. If you’re in a dispute with your landlord, then your deposit will be protected in the TDP scheme until the issue is sorted out. Holding deposits Your landlord doesn’t have to protect a holding deposit (money you pay to ‘hold’ a property before an agreement is signed). Once you become a tenant, the holding deposit becomes a deposit, which they must protect. Deposits made by a third party Your landlord must use a TDP scheme even if your deposit is paid by someone else, such as a rent deposit scheme or your parents.
The thing is, and I'm not saying all landlords are like this, but the law doesn't mean much to some landlords, especially when there could be another 50+ tenants lining up who are either ignorant of the law or so desperate for somewhere to live they don't care much about the legalities.
This is the issue with the housing market in Amsterdam as well. When renting there, you pay a deposit (of up to 3 months rent in some cases). Realtors (aka the middle man) sometimes request a months' rent non-refundable for their "services", which is illegal when you've found the place yourself and they've done nothing for you. If you complain, they just rent out to someone who doesn't. This happens because the landlord and realtors are all buddies.
This is an issue with landlords having more power than tenants, the solution should be a major increase in tenant rights.
The UK does lag behind the rest of the EU. The lass's dad has, or has had property, in several countries and tenants have the power. Probably why renting is normal there as too are long term (as in many years) tenancies.
My experience with agencies in London has all be positive. Outside of London can be terrible. Renting in London you can be asked to pay up to half a months rent in agency fees, on top of the fee for a reference check for each tenant, and even a fee for a reference letter.
Not sure that’s entirely the case, can’t even lock into a 6 month contract anymore - the tenant can simply hand in notice after a month. The state some people leave the place is a disgrace, but it’s almost treated as acceptable, and good luck trying to get proper recompense. There are bad landlords, but there are equally as many bad tenants. Again, may be a difference between Scotland and England, but the cost for reference and credit checks are borne by the landlord.
Wot he said. If they don't use a third-party deposit scheme then steer well clear, no matter how hard it might be to find a property to rent. EDIT: Resolving disputes over alleged "damage" however.... well... you're on your own there unfortunately.
As far as I'm aware fixed-term tenancies are still a thing. I don't feel very sorry for most landlords, there are people that trash a place (and punishments for that should be harsher - extra rights should come with some extra responsibilities) but the landlord is still making a huge amount of money for not much work and I would argue a bad landlord is worse than a bad tenant and has the ability to negatively affect a larger number of people. The whole system here is ****ed, more houses are needed, tenant rights need to be expanded significantly, agency fees need to be banned and council houses need to make a return.
Not since 1st December last year (In Scotland) Trust me the landlord is not making huge amounts of money, not in the short term anyway, it’s a long term game - 15 plus years. It’s an investment, where what’s left over (once mortgage interest, insurance, agency fees, boiler cover, and tax are paid) is used to reduce the outstanding capital - most months it costs money. There is of course another option, to use the rent as an income and to not reduce the outstanding capital - simply sell at the end of the mortgage term recouping the original investment.
From my limited experience of being a landlord that has to be the most unrealistic statement I think I've read on this forum. After paying for all the checks, epc, management fees, upgraded alarms, upgraded electrics, insurance, repairs and general upkeep and costs that we've had to incur from damage we about broke even after paying our own rent in NZ. Actually, i'm not even sure that's the case, bills seemed to be coming in on a regular basis for one thing or another. Making a huge amount of money. Ha. Definitely not over 2-3 years anyway. Edit: Or you're correct and I was just doing it very, very wrong...
Surely that depends on your point of view. For a responsible landlord who actually carries out repairs, maintenance, etc, then there might not be much of a margin in it. For a crappy landlord who doesn't spend a single penny on maintenance and repairs - and doesn't even bother to get the place cleaned after the previous tenants left the place in a filthy state - it's probably a different story.
Of course you aren't going to get rich if you behave like a landlord should behave. Upgrades? Insurance? Fixing broken stuff? Returning deposits? All unnecessary expenses, also do it under the table so hmrc doesn't get a penny. Want even more money? Increase the number of rooms by dividing existing ones and rent them out individually. *text above should not be understood as actual advice*
