Tired of being a landlord

Always Learning said:
What's so hard to believe? If you're straight up and honest with people from the get go it works quite easy provided they are the kind of tenant suited to that type of arrangement. With the market we are in, you can have your pick of tenants so good one's are not particularly hard to find.

Like seriously, what's so crazy about asking a tenant to order a washing machine online if the current one breaks?

Maybe I am just really lucky, but if I've replicated the same results on 7 occasions so far then you'd have to start thinking it's not down to luck anymore and perhaps down to the approach?
Click to expand...
I've been a tenant and a landlord. That's the relationship I've always had with my landlord or tenant. If the microwave or toaster breaks I'd replace it and I wouldn't dream of looking for the money from the landlord. If it breaks it is because we broke it.
 
Use an agent with agreed limit on costs that they don't need to contact you about. Less income but less hassle.

However the rent goes to the landlord and then the landlord paids the agent.
 
Purple said:
I've been a tenant and a landlord. That's the relationship I've always had with my landlord or tenant. If the microwave or toaster breaks I'd replace it and I wouldn't dream of looking for the money from the landlord. If it breaks it is because we broke it.
Click to expand...
Not always the case, especially with the larger items.
Most of the land lords I dealt with over the years were fine with a quick message if something broke and just okaying replacements when things weren't under warranty. When something that is a few weeks old breaks, it can usually be replaced free of charge.
 
Respectfully, being a landlord is not passive income. Just as you want to sort out problems that occur in your home, your tenant want to do the same, but cannot fix things without your say-so or direction. They are paying you rent in exchange for you providing them a contracted service; they do not and will never own the house so they are not interested in investing their own capital into double paying for the service. Just as I wouldn't expect to pay for the repairs of the office cleaner's van.

If you do not want to engage in this contract anymore, then sell the house. If you feel responsible towards the family, then offer to sell it to them. If they cannot buy it at the amount that you are satisfied with, then you have found the limit of your perceived responsibility. The truth is that if they are bothering you then you should let it go. Things are only going to become more unpleasant in the housing market in the coming years.
 
Some of the replies in this thread don't sound like landlords or tenants, unless they been or had the world most easiest tenants.

You tend to get tenants that either you never hear from or ones ringing you every other week with some issue. Not hearing from them isn't always a good thing either.
 
ClubMan said:
Indeed. I see several people calling it that here on Askaboutmoney which always amazes me. I mean, even living in your own home isn't a passive activity given that there's always something that needs fixing, replacement, changing etc.!
Click to expand...

A house full of kids for 20yrs wouldn't do the damage some tenants do in 1.
 
VonHohenzollern said:
Respectfully, being a landlord is not passive income.
Click to expand...
It is not exclusively but to a very large extent passive income.

Who will make more money? A diligent landlord with one apartment? Or a lazy landlord with two apartments? Of course the lazy landlord will make more money because she has more capital at work.

Landlording requires a fair bit of work, and often at times when you least want it. But a landlord's money does a lot more work than the landlord will.
 
Passive income doesn't only mean no labour it can mean minimal labour.

A good tenant is a lot less work, but that's pot luck.
 
Look ahead said:
Will the Council offer him the going rate though?
Click to expand...


I suspect you would have to get an independent valuation and then the Council would make an offer.
If they don't offer the going rate, then effectively it's the council that are evicting the tenant and not the OP.

I am in the same situation and will be pursuing this path in the new year.
I will report my findings.
 
ClubMan said:
Indeed. I see several people calling it that here on Askaboutmoney which always amazes me. I mean, even living in your own home isn't a passive activity given that there's always something that needs fixing, replacement, changing etc.!
Click to expand...

Okay, perhaps by the strict definition of the term, it is not strictly passive. However, for me, it's not far from it. I spend less than 10 hours a month on landlord duties over 7 properties.

AlbacoreA said:
A good tenant is a lot less work, but that's pot luck.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure it's luck, I've been able to replicate the results on several different occasions across my properties, which leads me to believe there is an element of having the right strategy to it. I pick all my tenants myself, I don't leave it to an agent. Having housing in such demand certainly helps, because there are a lot of good tenants looking for places at the moment.
 
99% of your problems evaporate if you do your own vetting of tenants. A decent intelligent, self reliant tenant will only contact you when they understand that there is no other option.
I only interview/show the property to 9 or 10 prospective tenants, spending 30 mins with each of them, after a time you intuitively know who will be best fit.
 
Knuttell said:
99% of your problems evaporate if you do your own vetting of tenants. A decent intelligent, self reliant tenant will only contact you when they understand that there is no other option.
I only interview/show the property to 9 or 10 prospective tenants, spending 30 mins with each of them, after a time you intuitively know who will be best fit.
Click to expand...

Exactly, I actually narrow viewings down to maybe 3 people now because I can tell the most promising ones quite easily from the format of the e-mails. How they structure the e-mail alone can tell you a lot about them. And like you, I spend a half hour with them and build a relationship with them during the first couple of days. After that, I usually don't hear from them again for the rest of the year!
 
Knuttell said:
I only interview/show the property to 9 or 10 prospective tenants, spending 30 mins with each of them, after a time you intuitively know who will be best fit.
Click to expand...

Maybe you have special powers of psychological analysis but most landlords don't. The best approach is:
  1. Don't go on personal connection but screen the financials/employment/references very carefully, including by checking them. You don't need to connect with a tenant the way you need to get along with someone you are hiring to be a colleague for example
  2. Respond promptly and politely to requests once the tenancy has started. Make it clear that you're not their friend but someone providing a paid service.
  3. Make frequent inspections as is your legal right
  4. Come down like a ton of bricks at the earliest signs of non-respect of property or non-payment of rent
  5. Make sure all your instructions to tenants on upkeep of property are followed up in writing

Always Learning said:
And like you, I spend a half hour with them and build a relationship with them during the first couple of days. After that, I usually don't hear from them again for the rest of the year!
Click to expand...
That's pretty bad practice. You should inspect maybe three times in the first year of tenancy and at least annually after that. A negligent tenant (even one who pays the bills) can cause you a lot of cost in the long run if they are letting the place get run down.
 
Knuttell said:
99% of your problems evaporate if you do your own vetting of tenants. A decent intelligent, self reliant tenant will only contact you when they understand that there is no other option.
I only interview/show the property to 9 or 10 prospective tenants, spending 30 mins with each of them, after a time you intuitively know who will be best fit.
Click to expand...
30 mins? What in the name of the Lord God do you talk about for 30 minutes? Most people I know today, and I know quite a few, wouldn't be capable of holding a conversation for 5 mins, never mind 30, then not able to look you in the eye. Now, that's what I'd be after. I like someone that can look you in the eye when you ask them an awkward enough question about renting and the how's and why's. Amazing what the eyes can tell you.
 
Lol ....I could talk for Ireland.

Get a better sense of a person and you'd be surprised what you'd hear that would alert you to the fact they were likely going to be bothersome....spend 30 mins now and save yourself years of RTB engagement...funny what you can tell from a handshake as well.
 
NoRegretsCoyote said:
Maybe you have special powers of psychological analysis but most landlords don't. The best approach is:
  1. Don't go on personal connection but screen the financials/employment/references very carefully, including by checking them. You don't need to connect with a tenant the way you need to get along with someone you are hiring to be a colleague for example
Click to expand...

I disagree, well kind of... of course the financials have to be in order that goes without saying, I'd have that sorted in advance (via the e-mail process I touched on above) and I wouldn't be showing the property to anybody who wasn't suitable from a financial point of view. Once that screening process is done though and the suitable prospective tenants are left, it's all about the personal connection. For me anyway, and I think that's why I don't get any trouble. They understand the way in which I approach the landlord / tenant relationship and because of that I don't get bothered with stupid requests.

NoRegretsCoyote said:
That's pretty bad practice. You should inspect maybe three times in the first year of tenancy and at least annually after that. A negligent tenant (even one who pays the bills) can cause you a lot of cost in the long run if they are letting the place get run down.
Click to expand...
You've interpreted me not being bothered by my tenants from one end of the year to the next with me not checking on my properties from one end of the year to the next. I never said that, I check my properties twice a year, but that's a result of me contacting my tenants not the other way around.
 
inkpot said:
Sell
Always Learning said:
Yes that's correct, but firstly, I vet all all the tenants myself and only take on people I have a good relationship with. Once I explain everything upfront and honestly at the start, it doesn't seem to be a problem as my tenants tend to be the kind of people who would prefer more autonomy in the property.

Secondly, it's a slightly grey area. I'm accepting responsibility for fitting out the places to a high standard, I have no problem paying for the replacement. I simply ask that the tenant arrange the delivery of the items needed. Technically I'm probably in the wrong but it's no where near severe enough to bring any heat on me from the law.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
It makes far more sense for a tenant to arrange replacements and repairs and then recoup the cost from you, but unfortunately, I think the reason this is now a requirement is because lots of landlords were unreasonably slow on repairs in the past. In my last tenancy but one, I recall discovering a fridge freezer was faulty when I moved in. It took a full year of repeated complaints to the landlord to get a replacement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top