Can I ask my landlord to replace the couch?

Fol20

mrslancaster wrote: »

I'm very curious as to why LL's furnish property with couches, beds, tables, chairs etc etc when they are not legally obliged to?

In the past, rentals were always furnished but people generally only rented for a few years. If people are going to rent for longer terms in future, it does not make sense that they don't have their own things.

Afaik, the only requirement for a LL is to provide white goods - F/F, cooker, oven, microwave, w/m but I could be wrong.

It seems to me that LL's should start sticking exactly to the law in every aspect. Be compliant and register the tenancy, give allowed rent increases, correct notice periods, allow peaceful occupation, fix the broken stuff they need to, etc etc

Then maybe they should just do what the law says about furnishings also? It would save a lot of grief and avoid disputes over damage and deposits at the end of a tenancy.

I completely agree with you. The only reason why im forced to get furniture is because its the norm here for what tenants expect. If you go outside the norm, your advertising to a much smaller audience. The only way i can really see this coming into the mainstream is if legislation forces ll to change or if certain REITs create a monopoly or duopoly of the market and force the change on everyone else.

Dav010

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

How do you know this?

I would suspect that most LL would be inclined to avoid spending much on furnishings that may suit one tenant but not another, and that may need to be replaced after a tenant moves out. I’ve had to replace sofas/chairs/beds/lockers, not because of the price paid for them, but because the tenants wrecked them. Now I buy low cost furnishings that I won’t mind replacing at the end of a tenancy.

Pawwed Rig

Dav010 wrote: »

I would suspect that most LL would be inclined to avoid spending much on furnishings that may suit one tenant but not another, and that may need to be replaced after a tenant moves out. I’ve had to replace sofas/chairs/beds/lockers, not because of the price paid for them, but because the tenants wrecked them. Now I buy low cost furnishings that I won’t mind replacing at the end of a tenancy.

The tenant has been there 8 years which negates your point.

ted1

beauf wrote: »

There are rules in some countries where you return the rental completely empty and newly painted.

It makes inspections and damage much easier no issues with furniture and contents.

Not sure about that fresh paint can conceal slot if issues

Dav010

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

The tenant has been there 8 years which negates your point.

Actually the time scale makes no difference whatsoever unless I was trying to make the tenant pay for the damage, after 8 years wear & tear has to be expected and accepted.

Most LLs will not spend big on furnishings in rentals, irrespective of whether the person is there one year or eight.

skallywag

mrslancaster wrote: »

In the past, rentals were always furnished but people generally only rented for a few years. If people are going to rent for longer terms in future, it does not make sense that they don't have their own things.

Agree strongly with that.

If Ireland is going to get to the point of having a mature rental market, e.g. compared to other countries where renting is very much the norm, then it needs to move to a model where the property is rented empty, apart from kitchen and bathroom. Those who wish to rent mid to long term are of course going to want to have their own furnishings, etc.

Pawwed Rig

If I had a tenant for 8 years and they were looking after the house well traditionally I would keep the rent low (as did large numbers of LLs my last one included). As one can no longer do that due to RPZ they need to be looked after in other ways. If this means spending a relative tiny amount more on furnishings then so be it. Whatever I spend on tenants only actually costs half (after tax) so generally not a huge concern.

mrslancaster

Fol20 wrote: »

I completely agree with you. The only reason why im forced to get furniture is because its the norm here for what tenants expect. If you go outside the norm, your advertising to a much smaller audience. The only way i can really see this coming into the mainstream is if legislation forces ll to change or if certain REITs create a monopoly or duopoly of the market and force the change on everyone else.

If a Part4 tenancy in a RPZ was finished, tenants moved out and LL removed everything except what they are legally obliged to provide, then advertised at the legally allowed rent, would there be no takers?

I think there would be a lot of potential tenants for an unfurnished property but that's just my opinion.

So many LL's talk about the costs of staying in the rental market and the headaches that go with it.

Unfurnished would reduce turnaround times for LL between tenancies. They would not have the huge costs of re-fitting out an entire house or apartment for a new letting and the time that takes, there would be less paperwork and accounting fees - I'm sure there are other benefits.

Maybe it would just take one or two LL's to start letting unfurnished and it would gradually change.

Of course there could be other legal reasons for sticking with fully furnished that I don't know about

Dav010

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

If I had a tenant for 8 years and they were looking after the house well traditionally I would keep the rent low (as did large numbers of LLs my last one included). As one can no longer do that due to RPZ they need to be looked after in other ways. If this means spending a relative tiny amount more on furnishings then so be it. Whatever I spend on tenants only actually costs half (after tax) so generally not a huge concern.

That is enviable. But I have found that most tenants are indifferent to how much it has cost you to replace furniture, they treat expensive and cheap furniture the same way as it does not belong to them, why spend more than you have to?

skallywag

mrslancaster wrote: »

I think there would be a lot of potential tenants for an unfurnished property but that's just my opinion.

Most definitely.

It is a mindset thing I would say, in that folk just see it as the accepted norm. If I was renting mid to long term myself though I would most definitely want to furnish it myself.

If one tried to rent a furnished property on the continent you would actually struggle to do so usually.

Del2005

mrslancaster wrote: »

If a Part4 tenancy in a RPZ was finished, tenants moved out and LL removed everything except what they are legally obliged to provide, then advertised at the legally allowed rent, would there be no takers?

I think there would be a lot of potential tenants for an unfurnished property but that's just my opinion.

So many LL's talk about the costs of staying in the rental market and the headaches that go with it.

Unfurnished would reduce turnaround times for LL between tenancies. They would not have the huge costs of re-fitting out an entire house or apartment for a new letting and the time that takes, there would be less paperwork and accounting fees - I'm sure there are other benefits.

Maybe it would just take one or two LL's to start letting unfurnished and it would gradually change.

Of course there could be other legal reasons for sticking with fully furnished that I don't know about

Furniture or no furniture in a rental will make little difference to someone thinking of renting out. The fact that the system is completely biased to the tenants is what is stopping people from entering the market and the proposed legislation won't change that.

Fol20

skallywag wrote: »

Most definitely.

It is a mindset thing I would say, in that folk just see it as the accepted norm. If I was renting mid to long term myself though I would most definitely want to furnish it myself.

If one tried to rent a furnished property on the continent that you would actually struggle to do so usually.

You hit the nail, its a culture in mindset rather than a legal aspect.

As another poster mentioned, if we need to get to a mature rental industry, we really need to go this way asap.

One route i would like that would entice this method is unfurnished properties normally attract longer term tenants so in turn are long term rental. These could be taxed at a cheaper tax rate potentially. This would help tenants for long term stability and ll in terms of tax and hassle.

beauf

dudara wrote: »

You can't just get rid of someone else's property. The landlord still owns that sofa, and you would need their agreement to dispose of it.

I kinda assumed no one would think otherwise ....

Pawwed Rig

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

How do you know this?

It would be what the landlord decides so, by default, will be what the landlord decrees as the bare minimum for the property/tenant, which may or may not be up to the expectations of the tenant.

As to what that minimum is? In all my years renting I never came across a good quality and easily cleanable sofa, nor in friends/relatives rented properties.

So slightly more than anecdotal evidence.

I would also not be giving a tenant a 3grand corner unit. I would pay for something sturdy and long lasting (and that may not be the most comfortable or luxurious sofa, even in it's price bracket)

Gumbo

beauf wrote: »

How do you think people do this in their own homes? You arrange for collection of the old one when you buy a new one. ???

You cannot simply dispose of the LL's couch unless you have permission to do so.

kceire

kceire wrote: »

You cannot simply dispose of the LL's couch unless you have permission to do so.

Also, stores take your old stuff (which is generally knackered).
Don't think the LL would be happy with you trashing functional white goods

The_Honeybadger

Serenesabines wrote: »

I’ve been living in the house for about 8 years. There is one small two seater couch that’s not aged well. I’m actually getting pain in my neck and back from it. I have bought so many pillows and supports to make it work, but it hasn’t helped me much.
It doesn’t have removable pillows, so repairing or upgrading isn’t possible. Is it very cheeky to ask my landlord to replace it?

You can ask but god only knows what POS hand me down he will come up with. If you can afford it buy your own, even a good condition used one and at least you’ll know what you are getting and can take it with you if you move on.

Obviously clear it with him first and ask him to take away the old one if he is agreeable.

Fol20

Im actually surprised at the amount of people saying get your own couch. I would have thought most would fob it off to the ll and in the rare occasion here, it is the ll responsibility for the couch not the tenant.

miamee

Fol20 wrote: »

Im actually surprised at the amount of people saying get your own couch. I would have thought most would fob it off to the ll and in the rare occasion here, it is the ll responsibility for the couch not the tenant.

The effort and thought a landlord might put into choosing a couch for himself would not be the same effort and thought he'd put into choosing one for the tenant - she already has a literal pain in the neck from the current couch landlord has in the property so choosing one that suits her is probably the best idea to avoid another pain in the neck. I used to have a similar uncomfortable two seater yoke in a rental, it looked absolutely fine but sitting in it for any length of time was another story.

Pawwed Rig

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So slightly more than anecdotal evidence.

You haven't provided evidence at all. You dressed up an opinion and presented it as evidence. Big difference.

Fol20

miamee wrote: »

The effort and thought a landlord might put into choosing a couch for himself would not be the same effort and thought he'd put into choosing one for the tenant - she already has a literal pain in the neck from the current couch landlord has in the property so choosing one that suits her is probably the best idea to avoid another pain in the neck. I used to have a similar uncomfortable two seater yoke in a rental, it looked absolutely fine but sitting in it for any length of time was another story.

Understand where your coming from, and at the end of the day, you look out for number one and your health is most important. In this occasion though, it will make it awkward for the tenant for moving couches in the future to a new home unless they potentially agree to leave it in the current house(if ll agrees). Im a ll btw .

Dav010

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

You haven't provided evidence at all. You dressed up an opinion and presented it as evidence. Big difference.

Which is effectively what you are doing by saying you spend more than you need to because your tenants are good tenants.

Each LL will have their own view on this, but a LL does not need to spend any more than necessary to replace an item of furniture. If you want to spend more, good on ya.

crkcvnirl

Serenesabines wrote: »

I’ve been living in the house for about 8 years. There is one small two seater couch that’s not aged well. I’m actually getting pain in my neck and back from it. I have bought so many pillows and supports to make it work, but it hasn’t helped me much.
It doesn’t have removable pillows, so repairing or upgrading isn’t possible. Is it very cheeky to ask my landlord to replace it?

Yes you can and you should!

Assetbacked

We have a very old, bit tattered set of couches in our rental. Upon moving in we brought up the couches with the agent and he was a bit hesitant. However, you would struggle to get them taken away for free let alone get anything for them, they're certainly not in any way designer or a product purchased in the last decade. As such, we intend to just dispose of them and get a nice couch as we don't plan on moving on anytime soon so see it as a worthwhile investment for the place. I'm not telling the agent and do not see it as a big deal as it will be a drastic enhancement to the living room once we get our new couch.

skallywag

Assetbacked wrote: »

...I'm not telling the agent and do not see it as a big deal as it will be a drastic enhancement to the living room once we get our new couch...

If making any change to a rental property I would always notify the owner in advance. You are just leaving yourself open for possible trouble in the future otherwise.

Fol20

Assetbacked wrote: »

We have a very old, bit tattered set of couches in our rental. Upon moving in we brought up the couches with the agent and he was a bit hesitant. However, you would struggle to get them taken away for free let alone get anything for them, they're certainly not in any way designer or a product purchased in the last decade. As such, we intend to just dispose of them and get a nice couch as we don't plan on moving on anytime soon so see it as a worthwhile investment for the place. I'm not telling the agent and do not see it as a big deal as it will be a drastic enhancement to the living room once we get our new couch.

If you want to pay for a new couch out of pocket and let the ll keep the couch. You need to tell the ll if you are disposing of their couch. I have never heard of a ll turning down a free new couch especially if the old one is in very bad condition.

If you dont tell the ll and he finds out later, this could sour your relationship. Even though you have good intentions, i as a landlord would wonder what else are you doing without my express permission.

Ray Palmer

I can say that as a LL I would go down the route of letting the tenant pick the sofa if they have been there any decent length of time. At 8 years I would certainly let the choose and give them a budget.

Would want it to be in keeping with the property and the right size would be my only restriction. Once walked in to a property to find the tenant had thrown out our sofa a bough a much cheaper and bigger sofa that block a door. They wondered why I was bothered because we would get to keep the sofa. €2k sofa replaced with €800 one! It was only 2 years old

Fol20

Ray Palmer wrote: »

I can say that as a LL I would go down the route of letting the tenant pick the sofa if they have been there any decent length of time. At 8 years I would certainly let the choose and give them a budget.

Would want it to be in keeping with the property and the right size would be my only restriction. Once walked in to a property to find the tenant had thrown out our sofa a bough a much cheaper and bigger sofa that block a door. They wondered why I was bothered because we would get to keep the sofa. €2k sofa replaced with €800 one! It was only 2 years old

I think the worsst situation i came across where the tenant did something themself was attempting to “fix” the electrics themself. One tenant had a light that wasnt working and put a wire into the fusebox and put black tape along with said wire along the ceiling all the way to the room where the light wasnt working. God only knows what they were thinking instead of just a quick call to me.

Pawwed Rig

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

You haven't provided evidence at all. You dressed up an opinion and presented it as evidence. Big difference.

I don't think that you comprehend what "anecdotal evidence" covers

Pawwed Rig

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I don't think that you comprehend what "anecdotal evidence" covers

Anecdotal. Not slightly more.