19Apr 2012

Property Landlord Advice: Choosing a Tenant – Landlords needs first – by law!

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

One of the areas that crop up again and again when we are going about our job, is the relationship between ourselves as Agents of the Landlord and our prospective and actual Tenants. It is and always has been in our interests to have good relationships with our Tenants and we continue to promote that at all times, but when it comes to our position legally we have to consider the Landlord above the needs of the Tenant and it is this stance which is often mis-understood!

Tenant’s rights.

 We do of course give the Tenants duty of care, but two situations have arisen this morning which yet again could and possibly does leave us looking like ‘bad boys’ if we proceeded and made what we believe to be the best decisions in the interests of the Landlord. The first issue surrounds another Tenant viewing and proceeding with a property before a second prospective Tenant had viewed. There was a statement made about who was due to see the property first which we could not agree with as we do not give preferential rights of viewing as a Company Policy.  

I saw it first!

This is simple enough to understand, if the first person to phone cannot view for a week, do we stop others who can view today? No because it would not be in the interest of the Landlord and our decision is an easy one! In this case what has clouded the issue for the prospective Tenant, is that they felt they had been promised to be shown first but as we never do give such promises, because it is never in the interests of our Landlords, this would simply never be the case. It is more likely that there was a misunderstanding of what was being asked and promised, but it ended with a nasty phone call to myself and my staff which of course is not acceptable for either party.

Best Tenant.

The second problem was one where in asking for information to assist finding a property for a potential Tenant, nothing has been forthcoming since we asked from the Tenant. Now when they ask to view a property again, which we know will be impossible without the information, do we tell them no without delay? We are of course always charged to find the best Tenant at all times for our Landlords and that inevitably means making decisions. We have to otherwise we would not be doing our job.  But it is highly likely this situation will again end up with a disappointed party, but we are not bound to find property for all who contact us, just those we believe will be good Tenants.

Overriding facts.

In every situation we are bound to make the decision that is in the best interests of our clients and that is our Landlords. This means disappointing some who contact us. But until Tenants understand that we have a legal commitment to serve our Landlords and that overrides any duty of care towards Tenants  (unless that neglect of duty includes an illegal act or stance) such issues will continue to occur. What of course we can hope is that not every time someone does not get what they want it does not end up in aggressive phone calls. 

19Apr 2012

Current Property News: EPC Regulations still being clarified.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

With the recent change in EPC regulations, we like many other Agents turned to our advisors and asked for clarification of what the changes meant and what was there considered practical way they could advise us to adopt the changes as required. The answer we received raised more questions than it answered and we were left none the wiser. It appear that the manner in which the changes have been introduced have left those who carry out the inspections at a quandary in understanding what is now required.

Agents requirements.

The main change for Letting Agents is to have the EPC available within seven days of the property being marketed. I am pleased to say that this was our own timetable anyway but always done with the knowledge that we had longer if the EPC was not forthcoming. No for us the clarity needs to be around what is meant by an electronic copy, when the report from the RLA states that the new format should be used after April 1st, but fails to say if this is ONLY for new EPC’s created rather than an updated version of the old certificate.

Words speak volumes.

 Some reports suggest that this is the case, but when you attempt to download EPC’s that are still current but were produced in the old format, they are still in the old format! So ‘the powers that be’ need to clarify for those concerned what they should or should not be doing. It becomes more of a problem when those that are supposed to be advising do not know themselves!

Simple guidelines.

At present we are ensuring we are operating in a manner best suited to the intent of these changes until we receive total clarity, which means we will avoid any unnecessary costly changes to our systems whilst still providing the information when requested and ensuring one is available without delay.

These guidelines will hopefully assist in the meantime:

1. When viewing a property ideally an EPC or at least the new front page should be “available”

2. Available means it can be in electronic format

3. An EPC MUST be commissioned immediately on marketing if existing one not available

4. Long as you can prove you have commissioned then for up to 7 days you can view and market without one. It is an offence but there is no penalty!! It is after 7 days that it becomes more serious

5. The eventual winning tenant MUST be given a copy of the full EPC when the contract starts i.e. at check-in.

18Apr 2012

Current Property News: Rightmove figures give insight for purchasers.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

In surfing the net for Current Property News, I note with interest two sets of figures that have been published this week. Firstly the Rightmove calculation of asking prices throughout the country and secondly The Average House guide published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) Bothe offer many varied statistics, breaking down details by region and County as well as National.

Significance of the gap.

When you look at the two headline figures, it is quiet significant that the asking price on average across the Country is £20,000 higher than the actual selling price and with the push of the Rightmove report being that on average house prices are at an all time high again across the Country, it does look as if sellers, knowing they will get offers no matter how the word the price within sales particulars, are asking at a higher level and negotiating on average a 10% lower price than that asked for.

Significant difference.

But what is also apparent is that the difference in average prices between London and the rest of the Country is vast and still growing. Since the peak of 2008, prices in London have risen by 14.9% whereas prices in the rest of the UK have fallen by 4.3% during the same period. This such a significant swing that it does make the average figures somewhat irrelevant, but the regional figures given by Rightmove are very informative and definitely give significant information for those needing to track values across this time frame.

Solid information.

It is good for all interested parties to receive information both in this manner and broken down in to regional statistics that both reports give. For example I have a property myself that was initially marketed in late 2007, it is currently rented (no surprise there then!) but as the Tenant has asked about the opportunity to purchase, it is easy for me to work out what would be the current price using the averages published in these reports. Both parties can use then for the same reasons, definitely allowing initial conversations to take place without the expense or time needed to get the property re-valued.

Assistance.

I cannot see how this situation does anything but assist people by keeping them informed. For the professionals, some of the mystique of pricing houses is removed, giving the vendor and buyer better confidence in the asking price and indeed any offers made as well. A definite win – win situation and I applaud Rightmove in particular for the manner in which they present the information and make it easily available for all.

Look and you will find.

The only disappointment and yes there had to be one! Is that the BBC who I have oft criticised for the way in which they place a negative spin on anything to do with the housing market have chosen to scale down the amount of reporting now that the shock and horror of house prices falling has lessened and we have all learnt to live with what the market delivers? Like most, I see slow growth continuing which most commentators agree with. It seems the BBC is only happy to give more time to the housing market when it gives them the opportunity to report on bad news and it looks as though our market will continue to receive little air time from the BBC for the foreseeable future. Time will tell if I am right!

17Apr 2012

Current Property News: Landlord wins Judgement against bad Tenant.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

Just occasionally matters come to the point where faith in the system is not only renewed but also rewarded! The news we received this week is one of those cases.  We have a Landlord who has had great faith in dealing with the situation that was presented to them in a professional and thorough manner through the courts. Thankfully to a good conclusion as this was after we advised the Landlord that it was a case worthy of legal judgement,  ensuring that the Tenant was not allowed to get away with the state that they left the Landlords property in at the end of the Tenancy.

Ignored instruction.

We soon realised at the start of the Tenancy whilst doing our property visits that the house was not being cared for in the proper manner. General untidiness was soon becoming harmful to both the inside and outside of the house. We did everything we could to get the Tenant to carry out the work required, but in the end under instruction from the Landlord, following our advice, notice was given to leave. Any effort to keep the property in order at that stage ceased.

Check out.

When we then came to check the Tenants out of the property, the work needed to return the property to good order was vast! We photographed, noted, gained quotes and spoke to the Tenant about getting the work carried out. They disagreed, refused and eventually ignored all communications until the Landlord had no choice but to instruct the work in order for the home to be available for the rental market again.

Options.

 At this point we spoke again at length and in the end after looking at the cost of the dilapidations advised the Landlord to take the matter to court. This is of course a big decision to make, not only for the inevitable risk that such a decision brings with it, but also because of the actual task itself which can of course be daunting. The Landlords stood by their conviction and filed papers.

Courts take time.

Never was a statement more true. The original hearing was cancelled twice initially after sitting around all day to be told the court did not have enough time to hear the case, then at the Tenants request until a third date was finally set for this month and only now has the Landlord finally received a judgement. This made all the more understandable when you realise that the Tenant actually vacated in June 2010!!

Award.

But in the end it was worth it! The courts awarded the Landlord the whole of the claim for damages, the deposit in full and two months loss of rent because of the length of time it took to get the property fit for the market again. This is made all the better with the knowledge that the Tenant who replaced the person claimed against still enjoy living there and are treating the property as it should be treated by any good Tenant.

Summary

And what do we take from all of this? Well first of all that currently the law does not move quick enough to resolve matters for Landlords under such circumstances; it does not make sense for anybody to be left waiting for two years for a decision to be arrived at and even if it had been heard the first time the case was cancelled it would still have been nearly a year. That the reasons why such a case can be delayed for a further year are too lenient, because it should NOT be possible to postpone a hearing with such ease as was the case for the further delays suffered  and that Landlords need better help from the Deposit holding bodies, as this was a substantial amount they should not have been made to cope without when you consider the amount awarded to the Landlord by the Judge was over £3000.

The good side!

But thankfully the biggest conclusion is that it does pay to take your case to the courts. I of course do not know for sure, but people who leave property in such a condition probably hope the problem will go away because of the trouble needed to pursue the matter to conclusion, but also in the end the courts have awarded correctly and it proves that errant Tenants can be brought to justice if the Landlords have the strength of character to hold true!

16Apr 2012

Property Landlord advice: Tenant Deposit should be viewed for what it is.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

There is no doubt that the deposit paid by Tenant has been viewed differently since the introduction of the TDP Legislation which has of course famously been updated by The Localism Act which has been introduced this month. It is not surprising when you consider the legislation is all about protecting the deposit, that most Tenants now look upon this as an amount of money that should by rights be returned at the end of the Tenancy no matter what the circumstances, rather than a deposit to be used against any damage made at the property during the term of the Tenancy.

Wrong perception.

The worst case I have heard of happened to us only last week, where a Tenant using that time old well worn phrase, ‘my friend told me’ continued to inform us that she did not have to clean the property as that was now considered to be fair wear and tear!  Well that was a first for me, what next, Landlords who should supply cleaners for Tenants?

Immediate implications.

The problem here of course is that because this person has been badly advised, the Deposit will immediately go into dispute if negotiation does not achieve agreement, and when you consider that one of the approved schemes actually charges their Agents dependent upon how many claims are made, it leaves us in a ridiculous situation that would, should we still be with that supplier, cost us money for a totally unnecessary case. Whatever happens, it would leave a bad taste in somebody’s mouth and as the Agent we would probably be the subject of the Tenants wrath. Fortunately, we have managed to explain the correct procedure and the Tenant has agreed to pay for the property to be cleaned.

Bad advice.

Of course once bad advice has been given, when we meet the Tenants at the property, where no cleaning has been done, it is too late to put right, as officially, the Tenant will have no access  after we have taken back the keys, otherwise they remain liable for the rent as well. Frustrating for us, especially as we write beforehand clearly pointing out the work that needs to be done prior to the check out appointment, which includes all cleaning and even state if the Tenant needs further assistance that they should not hesitate to be in touch (Of course we know if there is liable to be a big issue because of our property visits beforehand)

Perception.

For me it is clear that the legislation has meant that the deposit is perceived as something that should be returned if rent has been paid and the Tenant has been reasonable in their conduct whilst at the property. This is simply not the case. The deposit is present should rent not be paid yes, but also to ensure the Landlord has a fund to fall back on should the Tenant damage the property. What we should all realise (and I speak as a Tenant myself ) is that the longer we live at a property the more chance there is that damage will be caused. That is just a fact of life, not damaged on purpose, just a by-product of living in a home!

13Apr 2012

Tenant Advise: Problems finding a house to rent.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

A letter recently published in my Local Stafford Paper, questioned the ability for some Tenants in difficult situations to be able to rent property in the town. The blame has been placed purely with the local Letting Agents, but takes a very simplistic view of the reasons why they have struggled. There are far more factors that need to be considered before any judgement can be made, and I am going to put the case for the agent through these pages.

 Law of Agency.

 Here it is again! But so many Tenants do not understand that we are bound by our (legal) agreement with the Landlord to give best advise under all circumstances. I offer a quote from a recent article by David Smith of Anthony Gold Solicitors, in The Negotiator magazine ‘this means that the Agent must act in his clients interests even where that produces a harsh outcome for the other party, in this case the Tenant’ I quote because I believe his words confirm the reality of our position better than any other description I have ever heard. So if a Landlord does not want pets, we would be breaking our legal agreement if we allowed Tenants with pets to move in to a house with express knowledge that they had. Equally, if a Landlord does not wish for Tenants in receipt of benefits then, we have to obey this instruction in exactly the same manner. We are not here to be judge or to offer succour to those in need, no matter how worthy the cause. We are here to follow our Landlords instruction, to the letter!

 The benefit system.

 There are several areas where the Benefits system fails to deliver for the Landlord, firstly, they pay four weekly in arrears. This means that the Landlord has to find more than a full month’s rent to keep his cash flow in order. Why, when we have sufficient Tenants who are able to pay rent in advance, should we suggest that the Landlord waits for their money and only gets a percentage of it (Yes it catches up eventually but not for a full year!) when they do receive payment. It is also paid direct to the Tenant now, and, as happened in our latest case, only when the rent was two months in arrears would the Council start to communicate with us as the Agent of the Landlord and only when the Tenant agreed, would the Council pay the rent direct to us. Please tell me why, under those circumstances should we encourage acceptance of Tenants in receipt of benefits. It would be good to say this was an isolated incident, and it would also be wrong to say that problems occur with all Benefit claimants. Unfortunately for those who do respect their commitment, most do not.

 Insurance.

 One of the (many!) benefits of using an Agent, is our ability to have the Tenants professionally referenced. All Agents should use a referencing Company whose acceptance of the Tenants automatically places the Landlord in a position to take Landlord Insurance to protect the Rent and pay Legal expenses should they be needed. Now because the system works well and because Agents know how to manage and control debt, the policies are still available in some instances for less than £100 per year (I only quote this figure as an example, because with FSA regulations in mind, I am not able to discuss the benefits of one Company above another!) If this was a policy that was relied upon again and again by Landlords it would cost far more, so it confirms without any doubt, that the referencing system works! Finally, no Agent worth their salt should, in my opinion, operate without the ability to offer Rent and Legal Expenses Insurance. Otherwise, how can it be argued that they are giving best advice to their clients?

 Guarantors.

 If a Tenant does not earn sufficient income, they may need a Guarantor; this is the natural manner in which income short fallings are balanced against the Industry standards used for income calculations. However, all Guarantors MUST be able to afford the rent. Look at the situation from the Tenants point of view, if a Tenant who could not afford the rent was moved in to a property without any check at all, it could be argued very easily that the Agent or Landlord had acted without due care to the Tenant, placing them in a position where they are unable to afford the commitment they have made. No different than being oversold items on Higher Purchase! Now, if they are able to provide a Guarantor, I can see no difference (and neither can the Industry) in what they should also be able to afford! Just because somebody agrees to be a Guarantor does not mean that the Tenant is automatically protected. The legal agreement clearly confirms that the Guarantor is responsible for the Tenants short fallings which includes all financial matters involved with the Tenancy. Now again, if we just accepted people on face value and they suddenly found themselves with a bill they could not pay, have we done our duty as Agents? Under such circumstances the Guarantor could easily claim to have been unfairly treated.

 Financial limits.

 Finally, the rates at which affordability calculations are judged, are not the responsibility of the Lettings Industry. They are developed and run by the financial referencing organisations, from whom Letting Agents are only responsible for using their services, not the manner in which they operate. We are all faced with rules that we have to abide by that we have input into the detail would be very rare. This is one such position. But as I have indicated before, such organisations and Insurance companies are subject to the law in the FSA regulations they must abide by. What we should NOT do is blandly allow people to be referenced for a property they cannot afford.

 Summary.

 So, it is very easy to blame the Industry and Agents in particular, but there are wider issues and pictures that need to be considered. That these people who were the reason for writing this piece have had difficulties because they are on Disability Allowance and Housing Benefit, I say they should look to the social organisations that are supposed to help them, rather than the Industry that on the face of it would have to break several codes of conduct to accommodate them. We are not able to move people in too a property against the Landlords wishes, we cannot ignore referencing and neither can we place our Landlords in a position where they cannot take the benefits of the most basic of Industry Insurance Policies. We cannot ignore the possible implications of accepting Housing Benefit Tenants and neither should we ignore what a Tenant and Guarantor can or cannot afford. Rather than being unfair, when you consider our legal position and to whom we are responsible, that is being Professional!   

 

12Apr 2012

Property Landlord advice: Choosing a Tenant – Landlords needs first – by law!

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

One of the areas that crop up again and again when we are going about our job, is the relationship between ourselves as Agents of the Landlord and our prospective and actual Tenants. It is and always has been in our interests to have good relationships with our Tenants and we continue to promote that at all times, but when it comes to our position legally we have to consider the Landlord above the needs of the Tenant and it is this stance which is often mis-understood!

Tenant’s rights.

 We do of course give the Tenants duty of care, but two situations have arisen this morning which yet again could and possibly does leave us looking like ‘bad boys’ if we proceeded and made what we believe to be the best decisions in the interests of the Landlord. The first issue surrounds another Tenant viewing and proceeding with a property before a second prospective Tenant had viewed. There was a statement made about who was due to see the property first which we could not agree with as we do not give preferential rights of viewing as a Company Policy.  

I saw it first!

This is simple enough to understand, if the first person to phone cannot view for a week, do we stop others who can view today? No because it would not be in the interest of the Landlord and our decision is an easy one! In this case what has clouded the issue for the prospective Tenant, is that they felt they had been promised to be shown first but as we never do give such promises, because it is never in the interests of our Landlords, this would simply never be the case. It is more likely that there was a misunderstanding of what was being asked and promised, but it ended with an nasty phone call to myself and my staff which of course is not acceptable for either party.

Best Tenant.

The second problem was one where in asking for information to assist finding a property for a potential Tenant, nothing has been forthcoming since we asked from the Tenant. Now when they ask to view a property again, which we know will be impossible without the information, do we tell them no without delay? We are of course always charged to find the best Tenant at all times for our Landlords and that inevitably means making decisions. We have to otherwise we would not be doing our job.  But it is highly likely this situation will again end up with a disappointed party, but we are not bound to find property for all who contact us, just those we believe will be good Tenants.

Overiding facts.

In every situation we are bound to make the decision that is in the best interests of our clients and that is our Landlords. This means disappointing some who contact us. But until Tenants understand that we have a legal commitment to serve our Landlords and that overrides any duty of care towards Tenants  (unless that neglect of duty includes an illegal act or stance) such issues will continue to occur. What of course we can hope is that not every time someone does not get what they want it does not end up in aggressive phone calls.

11Apr 2012

Current Property News: Landlords to address Legionnaires disease as well!

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

There are times a as a Letting Agent that it feels as if the whole world is looking to upset your apple cart. No sooner do we get to grips with the Localism Act when along comes the HSE and offers up another tasty treat for Landlords and Agents to comply with. This time it is Legionnaires disease and the implications of removing the size limit in water tanks that has bought every rented property in the country in line with the new Code of Practise issues by the HSE.

What Next!

I am not suprised that the Industry has read the detail and asked open mouthed what else are we liable to be asked to take on board? There are cases of Legionnaires found in residential homes, but if we start looking at statistics for the reasons why people fall ill in the home, or have accidents, then Legionnaires falls way down the list of matters that need addressing! The problem is that the HSE are the organisation responsible for controlling the disease, so as soon as the 300litre tank size restriction was removed, they have no option but to advise Landlords and Agents accordingly.

It’s a silly world.

It would of course be easy to look at other areas of concern and suggest for example that stairs are banned; all glass is covered by wire protection; cookers are limited to low temperatures; kettles are banned; children are banned from kitchens and treat all areas of danger in the same manner. There are times when we all think that such matters are treated with overkill, I am no different!

Deal with the facts.

 And those facts are that the industry is now evaluating the situation and dealing with the new Code of Practise. On the face of it and the initial reaction from the Industry suggested that there would now need to be further costs generated by regular inspections of all internal water systems. But I believe that those looking at the situation will be able to give us clear guide lines as we look to take the Code of Practise on board in a practical manner.  

Tenant responsibility.

Before and between tenancies, we will ensure systems are in place to deal with the requirements. Where a Tenancy exists, we will probably develop a strategy to deal with instructing the Tenant on how to ensure the problem is dealt with during the Tenancy by following prescribed instruction at regular intervals, such as heating the water system to required temperatures especially in modern property where the system can be easily dealt with. In older properties, it may well be a requirement that any areas of concern are highlighted and dealt with through an inspection.     

Professionals.

At the end of the day, we will deal with this as we have dealt with the numerous changes in legislation introduced in the last ten years, in the right manner. As I have always said if we call ourselves professionals, we deal with matters professionally. Even though it still seems like a sledge hammer to crack a nut! I once had a Health and Safety expert as a Tenant, who questioned the standard of fence between gardens at a newly built property, because his neighbours had a dog that barked at him every time he went in the garden. His take was that it is our responsibility to protect him as our Tenant from all eventualities.

Sensible solution.

 I wondered at the time if that would include building gates at the end of the drive, chopping down the trees across the road and installing conveyer belts for use instead of the stairs. What we do do as a matter of course is address these issues in a sensible and practical way. We ensure fences offer security, dog or no dog, trust people to be able to drive on the road and not crash in too the house, have people take responsibility for tree safety, in this case the local council on an adopted road and ensure that a hand rail is in place to assist everybody using the stairs. No doubt the solution for dealing with Legionnaires disease in the home will also prove to be just as practical!

10Apr 2012

Property Landlord advice: TDP paperwork plans finally in place.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

There are times as a Letting Agent that a job of work comes on the horizon which was unexpected but you know from day one, is going to take quite some time to research and complete. This has been the case with the legislation surrounding the Tenants Deposit Protection introduced in the Localism Act. We could see as soon as our advisors started to inform us of the upcoming release that this was going to be one of those times.

At the coal front.

It is still a saying that explains what has been needed to comply with the requirements of the Localism Act and the arranging, writing, collating, printing and posting has taken the best part of two weeks to complete. Not so surprising when you consider that every Landlord and Tenant has had to be contacted, but not only this but Tenants fell in too differing categories of action and therefore we have had to confirm where all of our Tenants sat before getting in touch. Being part of the day to day office means that I have been involved with dealing with most of this and that is why I use the coal face expression.

Understanding.

But by being the person who has written the letters, organised who needed to be placed in too what category, decided how each category has had to be dealt with (and physically collated the information and put the envelopes through the franking machine!) you end up with an understanding of not only what is being done but also why.

Implications.

Now we understand better the implications going forward and how it changes as our Tenants situation changes. For example, those who leave prior to the 5th of May, should only be concerned with how their next Tenancy is dealt with. But how many times have we known a move to break down just before it is completed! To counter this we have served paperwork on every Tenant, immaterial of when the Tenancy ends, because as we are a large Agency, there is more chance that at least one of those moving out will fall through and having worked so hard to ensure all the Tenants are dealt with correctly, this is not the time to let one slip through our net!

Revised procedures.

Getting to grips with these changes also means we have changed our procedures to ensure that the paperwork is correct now and every time. It has been discussed that Landlords and even some Agents would be better without a deposit as they will not be risking falling foul of the legislation in the first place if a deposit does not exist. I would disagree. As Agent of the Landlord, we are duty bound to give best advice about all scenarios and I cannot see a situation where no Deposit helps the Landlord. That means that we as Agents should be professional enough to deal with the paperwork correctly through our own systems.

Now is the time.

So what we have done is write to the Landlords two weeks ago, write to the Tenants last week and change our paperwork systems now, a full month before the legislation dictates that matters should be dealt with in line with the legislation. This will give us a full month to ensure our safeguards work and allow us to continue to offer a full professional service to our Landlords. Such changes and the work that they generate are not always welcome, change never is, but we must continue to embrace them, roll with them and adapt. Then and only then can we be in a position to call ourselves Professional Agents. Those who read my blog  regularly, will know I believe there is no other way!

28Mar 2012

Lettings News: Are Tenants Fully Aware of Their Responsibilities?

⋅ 1 Comment

By Craig Smith

At the beginning of February we posted about how some Landlords might not be fully aware of their responsibilities when letting a property. The Landlord doesn’t just have responsibilities at the start of the tenancy but throughout as well and, likewise, the tenant must ensure that they keep to their side of the contract too!

Tenant General Repairs

Common sense sometimes needs to be applied with regards to how far a tenants responsibility would reach. For example, a tenant would be responsible for changing a faulty light bulb or mowing a lawn regularly. Believe it or not some tenants will ask a Landlord to do some of the simplest tasks!

Another common area of dispute between a tenant and Landlord is when drains or pipes become blocked. Usually, this cost of having a drain unblocked would fall to the tenant, especially if they have lived at the property for some time. Whilst most tenants do take care of the property they live in like it was there own, occasionally items such as wipes will find their way into the sewer system. Generally, the rule is if a tenant has caused the issue then the tenant would be responsible for the cost of its rectification and this rule extends to most of the fixtures & fittings of a property.

Wear & Tear on a Rental Property

Over time some items will become worn regardless of whether the property is let or lived in by an owner. Electrical appliances such as washing machines or dishwashers will no doubt eventually break down. Of course, if the reason for the breakdown is the fault of the tenant (for example no salt being put into the dishwasher) then the tenant would be responsible as they should treat the appliance as their own, or in a ‘tenant like manner’. If the appliance has been looked after and has broken down due to age then the Landlord should be prepared to bear the cost.

Wear and tear is easily explained on appliances provided at a property but less so on the actual décor. Again, a tenant should make sure that wallpaper, carpets etc are looked after but a reasonable amount of wear & tear should be expected. The number of tenants can also determine the amount of wear expected, a family of 5 might cause heavier wear than a single person for instance.

Who Looks After the Garden?

Most tenancy agreements will state that the tenant should take care of the garden. Occasionally Landlords might include a gardener in the cost of the rental, more often so with large gardens or those with large trees & shrubs. Tenants would be expected to keep any lawns mowed, borders free of weeds and keeping the garden tidy. This will depend on the individual tenancy and, if a tenant is unsure, they should always check before entering into a tenancy.

Best Advice

As an agent, we always make tenants aware of their responsibilities before they sign any agreements with us. This helps to avoid any disputes further down the line and we would urge all Landlords to do the same!