Rent premium for increased occupancy ?

Ms Doubtfire1

L1011 wrote: »

Also, as has been said, parents idea of fair wear and tear (or pet owners, not that its on-topic) vs people without is completely different.

Disagree on the petwoners.I know EXACTLY how much damage my lot can cause I also know 1500 per year covers it.(that aside)

kidneyfan

A family might stay for eight years. The cost of refurbishment is trivial compared to a the cost of churn. (Of course different for you as it is an apartment - anything about this apartment that makes it attractive for a family?).

kidneyfan

ted1 wrote: »

Places should be painted every 4 years or so and families tend to stay longer. So writing on walls should not be an issue.
Mattresses can be depreciated over 8 years, so if they stay for 4 you can throw out the mattress and deduct 50% of the mattress price from the deposit and so on

2 years - revenue will allow 2 yearly writeoff with proof

runawaybishop

Mindset wrote: »

If there is wear and tear that would cost you money to fix take it out of their deposit at the end of the lease. I don't think its fair to charge extra premium just because its a family.
You can protect yourself by adding a clause in the lease agreement to safeguard you against pissy beds and marked walls.

War and tear cannot be taken out of a deposit. Families do more damage and cause greater wear and tear than professionals.

runawaybishop

myshirt wrote: »

Where are your ethics or sense of decency?

This is a business, not a charity.

yqtwqxqm

kidneyfan wrote: »

A family might stay for eight years. The cost of refurbishment is trivial compared to a the cost of churn. (Of course different for you as it is an apartment - anything about this apartment that makes it attractive for a family?).

I think people in general overestimate the cost of churn.
There has been no cost to churn for many a year now and it can actually be positive nowadays.
Look how many landlords are now ending a tenancy after 4 years no matter what. And if you dont know any, pose the question to landlords on boards and you will find out why.
Government interference, tying my hands would be top of the list for me.

yqtwqxqm

kidneyfan wrote: »

2 years - revenue will allow 2 yearly writeoff with proof

I find a new mattress has to be bought for every tenant now.
Better not to provide a mattress at that rate. Let the tenant buy a nice comfy one of their own and take it with them.
No matter what a landlord pays for a mattress it will be wrecked.

yqtwqxqm

yqtwqxqm wrote: »

I think people in general overestimate the cost of churn.

+1

There is no reason to even have a week of lost rent nowadays, you could easily have a new tenant moving in the morning after the previous one moves out and almost certainly at a higher rent.

I rent a room in a house and have filled the other rooms in the house for the LL when people have moved out, the last time someone moved out I placed an ad at 9am, had 6 or 7 call by half 9. 4 viewings arranged for that evening and one of them 4 took the room and had their deposit transferred to the LL before 9pm that night. I'm moving out myself in the next few weeks and have already people lined up to view the room without even placing an ad on daft (which I want to avoid as I know I'll get about 100 calls).

yqtwqxqm wrote: »

I find a new mattress has to be bought for every tenant now.

This I wouldn't agree with, I've never seen new mattresses being provided and this is in houseshares where there are new tenants moving in regularly. I'd guess the mattress is at least 10+ years old in my room and has seen many different tenants. If I were a LL I certainly wouldn't be replacing them unless they were wrecked and that takes years or else isn't normal wear and tear and could be deducted from the deposit.

K.Flyer

runawaybishop wrote: »

War and tear cannot be taken out of a deposit. Families do more damage and cause greater wear and tear than professionals.

Thats a very broad statement and not entirely true.
From my own experience of carrying out maintenance in hundreds of apartments a year, I would say its almost a 50 - 50 split.
I have seen apartments after so called professional tenants left like a tip, walls badly marked from bringing bikes into the hall, items broken etc and apartments after familes left spotless, and the converse of all of that.
Charge the normal going rate, increase on deposit, 6 month inspection, hold the deposit if there are any issues at the end.

Musketeer4

I'll second that. My sister rented her bunglow to an architect, an apparent "professional", and he left about 20 bags of decaying rubbish behind, the kitchen was in a desperate state with thick grease everywhere and hadtaken it upon himself to drill TV brakets onto the walls and had caused blockages in the septic tank system that I had to unblock - the rods i used came out covered in condoms, there must have been hundreds in there! <mod snip - dragging discussion off topic>
Subsequently let the house to a polish group of petrol heads working in the meat factory. House was spotless.

Elliott S

K.Flyer wrote: »

Thats a very broad statement and not entirely true.
From my own experience of carrying out maintenance in hundreds of apartments a year, I would say its almost a 50 - 50 split.
I have seen apartments after so called professional tenants left like a tip, walls badly marked from bringing bikes into the hall, items broken etc and apartments after familes left spotless, and the converse of all of that.
Charge the normal going rate, increase on deposit, 6 month inspection, hold the deposit if there are any issues at the end.

Yeah, I think a house might be better looked after if it's acting as a family home. Nobody wants their children living in a dirty environment. Whereas in house shares, things tend to not be as clean as people would have in the home they settle down in, I find. People just don't care as much about keeping a house share clean outside of the basics.

So I think it probably evens out. There is more wear and tear in some ways, but small repairs and regular cleaning that avoids that hard to remove grubbiness is more likely to happen.

runawaybishop

K.Flyer wrote: »

Thats a very broad statement and not entirely true.
From my own experience of carrying out maintenance in hundreds of apartments a year, I would say its almost a 50 - 50 split.
I have seen apartments after so called professional tenants left like a tip, walls badly marked from bringing bikes into the hall, items broken etc and apartments after familes left spotless, and the converse of all of that.
Charge the normal going rate, increase on deposit, 6 month inspection, hold the deposit if there are any issues at the end.

A lot of ads state professionals only because families do cause more damage and wear and tear over all. Anyone will kids will tell you how quickly they will make a mess of the place, no matter how vigilante they are.

athtrasna

Our final tenants were a family. The agent lied to us about inspections. When they moved out the damage included every toilet seat in the house broken, carpets and sofas and mattresses were all smelly, dirty and crunchy because they had never cleaned up spills or mud, kitchen cabinet doors were broken off...you get the picture. The first family we had let to and the tenants that made up our minds to end the landlord adventure. Never had an issue with professionals.

intheclouds

runawaybishop wrote: »

A lot of ads state professionals only because families do cause more damage and wear and tear over all. Anyone will kids will tell you how quickly they will make a mess of the place, no matter how vigilante they are.

I always thought ads stating professionals only mean no social welfare tenants.

I never imagined it meant no families, would 2 married doctors with children not be considered professionals?

runawaybishop

intheclouds wrote: »

I always thought ads stating professionals only mean no social welfare tenants.

I never imagined it meant no families, would 2 married doctors with children not be considered professionals?

Used to mean no families. Now means no RAS or families.

Professionals means people that don't spend much time in the house and have plenty of money to pay.

K.Flyer

Yes I have seen lettings with kids, kids can be untidy, but when they move out their untidyness goes with them.
My opinion is based on my personal experience of having the benefit of seeing a huge broad spectrum of tenancies, everything from the lowest to the highest around Dublin City, from corporate to the reluctant L.L
My work brings me into their personal space and it really can be an eye opener as to how some people live. There are not many here who have that insight, "through the keyhole" as such, and it has thought me you should never judge a book, a property or a tenant by the cover

_kookie

Im am just finished a let to a family.
Over the last 15 years I have had 2 families and 4 lets to professionals.
All lets to professionals have been just great, with no problems or stress.
Both families I let to, left the place in a mess and the furniture, walls, doors, garden destroyed, requiring work to rectify that cost well in excess of their deposit. Both families were quite happy to say "The children did it, its normal wear and tear. What did you think was going to happen with children?" like it was my fault for letting them rent from me in the first place.
The last family moved out last Friday and I am only now just ready to put the property back on the market. But Im going to try something else first while I have the chance - thats why i registered on boards, but i cant start a thread asking my question yet as i dont have enough posts.

I should have learned my lesson, but I thought the first family who did this might have been a one off, but no, the next one was even worse.

So I will never again rent to a family with children. I should have know you cant control children as my own have wrecked my house over the years. Its what they do and you can only try to minimise it by stopping them as the start writing on walls etc. But I didnt expect someone to just let their kids off and wreck the place and then not take any responsibility or pay for the damage themselves.

With professionals its very easy. They hardly ever complain or contact you unless its an emergency. Families are just too needy. They amount of contact needed would make you tear your hair out.

So i've been twice bitten now. And dont want a third bite.
Im sure there are lovely families out there, but my odds so far havent been good.

jester77

Can you not simply just put it in the contract that the house/apartment has to be returned in the same state as it was let?

Here, that is standard. You can paint the walls, put up wallpaper, hang anything you want on the wall, drill holes, add/remove non-supporting walls, put down carpets, etc. When you move out, everything gets returned to its original state, and walls are painted.

jester77

jester77 wrote: »

Can you not simply just put it in the contract that the house/apartment has to be returned in the same state as it was let?

Here, that is standard. You can paint the walls, put up wallpaper, hang anything you want on the wall, drill holes, add/remove non-supporting walls, put down carpets, etc. When you move out, everything gets returned to its original state, and walls are painted.

That sounds like an exceptionally bad idea to me. No way would I allow anything on that list above (bar maybe holes for a few paintings which I would want to see exactly where etc before hand and I'd want to do the drilling myself for them) even if it was claimed they would return it to look the same as it was before, as looking like it was before is about all it would most likely be (underneath it could be a disaster) or not even with the excuse of "oh we didnt know we had to return it etc". Give an inch and people will take a mile. Stick to professionals is the easiest option and lay down strict rules of what can and can't be done with the place and inspect regularly.

L1011

jester77 wrote: »

Can you not simply just put it in the contract that the house/apartment has to be returned in the same state as it was let?

Here, that is standard. You can paint the walls, put up wallpaper, hang anything you want on the wall, drill holes, add/remove non-supporting walls, put down carpets, etc. When you move out, everything gets returned to its original state, and walls are painted.

You can, but people won't do it and the deposit won't cover it.

_kookie

jester77 wrote: »

Can you not simply just put it in the contract that the house/apartment has to be returned in the same state as it was let?

Here, that is standard. You can paint the walls, put up wallpaper, hang anything you want on the wall, drill holes, add/remove non-supporting walls, put down carpets, etc. When you move out, everything gets returned to its original state, and walls are painted.

You can put what you like in a contract.
But the tenant can still do whatever they want and there is no comeback over the deposit amount for the LL.
A rental contract nowadays binds the LL very tightly, but does nothing to bind the tenants.
They just saill off into the sunset and there is nothing you can do.
Even worse is the practice of "Use my deposit as last months rent". Then you get nothing after they leave the place in a state.
And you can only hope that they actually move out and dont decide to stay and not pay rent anymore.

If I could be sure of a binding contract I would even be happy to let a person sign a contract for 5 years or more if they wanted, but all it would do is bind me for that time and they can just head off into the sunset whenever they feel like it.

For a contract to be of any use it must be enforceable by both sides.
Rental contract are not.