Renting in RPZ - landlord has decided to refurb so he can increase rent

Grumpypants

Graham wrote: »

because under this proposal a house at 833 tax free would only make a sound upgrade investment if the new rent were significantly in excess of 1666 (taxed). No point spending 20k on an upgrade if the new rent is obliterated by 50% tax/deducations.

There is already pretty much no financial incentive for landlords at rents of less than 833 to upgrade.

E.g. a rural house currently renting at 600/month is never going to be a candidate for a few upgrades because that same house with 20k worth of improvements is only likely to see 100ish increase in rent. The payback period of the improvements is going to be longer than the economic lifetime of those improvements.

When we are talking about a huge portion of landlords losing money and leaving the market, worrying about the tiny % of landlords with 20K to splash on major improvements seems misplaced.

Never mind that there is very little you could build for 20K on any property that would significantly boost the rent by the 50K needed to repay that 20K in the current scenario.

But I bet that 600 rural property could really see a benefit from small improvements like new windows, insulation, refurbishment or decorations or fitting, new furniture that could be paid for if the landlord was making an actual income on the property.

Graham

Grumpypants wrote: »

When we are talking about a huge portion of landlords losing money and leaving the market, worrying about the tiny % of landlords with 20K to splash on major improvements seems misplaced.

Any between 833 - 1666 would just not get touched because the landlord could never recoup the investments.

Grumpypants wrote: »

But I bet that 600 rural property could really see a benefit from small improvements like new windows, insulation, refurbishment or decorations or fitting, new furniture that could be paid for if the landlord was making an actual income on the property.

Sure, new windows 4k, insulation 1k, redecorating 2k, bit of new furniture 3k.

10k guesstimated spend. 100/month additional rent, 1200/yr. The additonal rent would pay that off in about 8 years assuming the landlord is either bad at maths or doesn't like seeing a return on an investment.

Removing tax on rental income for properties below 10k would have one major result. It would pretty much remove all rural-rental income from the tax net.

76544567

LLs certainly wont be recouping any investment at the current max of 4% increases anyway.
There will be no investment in properties with sitting tenants

Idbatterim

could you not agree on a rent rise that would be mutually acceptable for a few months, before you buy later in the year. You have been there for 6 years for god sake!

TimeToShine

TimeToShine wrote: »

In what world does a family of 4 "squeeze into" a 2 bed apartment? Even with the dog that is plenty of space.

I'm struggling for space in a 3 bed house and it's only two of us never mind a 2 bed apartment with 2 extra people and a dog.

Sierra Curved Swordplay

Sierra Curved Swordplay wrote: »

I'm struggling for space in a 3 bed house and it's only two of us never mind a 2 bed apartment with 2 extra people and a dog.

You have too much stuff!!!

Paulw

Mod Note: The thread seems to be a rant, rather than looking for advice help. Unless someone can give a very valid reason to leave it open - Thread closed.