Header Ad Module

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The week the landlords moved in

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The week the landlords moved in

    The TV show on TV one at the moment. Ignoring the biased greedy LL, poor tenant atmosphere of the show for a moment, has it made any LL’s question the care of their investment?

    Obviously the show highlights the need for regular inspections but I think it also shows that handing your investment off to a PM to look after and then forget about it (let and forget) is also risky. How many LLs are in this boat? I’m sure the majority of PMs keep their clients fully informed but how often do the owners drop in to see for themselves?

    If the tenant has stopped reporting required maintenance due to “nothing happens” fatigue or fear of rent raising repairs then is your investment being looked after? It’s not necessarily fault of the PM, tenant or LL, more a combined assumption of all three that everything is good enough.

    Have PMs seen an increase in LLs asking to visit their properties since the show started a couple weeks ago?
    Last edited by Learning; 21-03-2018, 03:21 PM.

  • #2
    I'm really enjoying this tv show. It seems fairly unbiased to me - the father and son landlord team that were on a few weeks ago were interesting. They couldn't understand why the place was in such a state when they arrived at the property and initially the father tried to blame the tenant. But after staying there for a couple of days and actually talking to the tenant, they did a huge U-turn - the son even shed tears over how the tenant was being forced to live, and in the end they did a pretty major reno but didn't raise the rent.

    And the one last week with the two young gun brother landlords who have a chef at home to cook for them - they also had a huge awakening.

    Because I live in the same city as my rentals, it is easy for me to do a drive-by every so often and I can also do a lot of the renovation work myself. I have continued to renovate my 1970's units over the years and I have always aimed to own units that I would be happy to live in myself. To that end, they now all have heatpumps, double glazing and as much insulation as possible, along with the obligatory new carpet every so often, and I have replaced a fair few kitchens and bathrooms over the years.

    Comment


    • #3
      I have never used a PM and do not plan to do so in the future. Like SimonW, all my residential rentals are to a standard that would suit me and I am a little fussy.

      One of my dilemmas is a commercial tenant who has a caravan in the yard, which is his 'bedroom.' I made mention of this in a topic I started, but the when is a commercial rental not a commercial rental conundrum was not really resolved.

      I have not seen and am not likely to see the TV program mentioned. Obviously there are differing views about media bias in the comments, so far. My general view is that the media cannot be trusted. Their focus is on ratings; not on accuracy, truthfulness, balance, or the like.

      That arrangement I described above is entirely the tenant's choice and he seems more than happy and comfortable with it. I would not want to live that way, by choice, even though I have done so, in the past.

      That tenants choice is the thing I see under threat, now. If a person willingly chooses that sort of lifestyle because it suits them for whatever reason, where do the loony Labour comrade commissariat do-gooder airheads, drongos, academics and sycophants get off, telling such tenants that they can't live like that?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Perry View Post
        .....
        That tenants choice is the thing I see under threat, now. If a person willingly chooses that sort of lifestyle because it suits them for whatever reason, where do the loony Labour comrade commissariat do-gooder airheads, drongos, academics and sycophants get off, telling such tenants that they can't live like that?
        The number of supposedly homeless is a key point here. That is a stick to beat previous administrations with, a vote catcher for a particular constituency and an opportunity to look concerned and set up a working group or three.

        'Supposedly homeless' because Statistics definition is wider than used by other countries and because rarely are the hard 'why is that' questions asked.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Perry View Post
          That tenants choice is the thing I see under threat, now. If a person willingly chooses that sort of lifestyle because it suits them for whatever reason, where do the loony Labour comrade commissariat do-gooder airheads, drongos, academics and sycophants get off, telling such tenants that they can't live like that?
          So the tenants choose to live like this; 'this' being any form of sub standard residence, be it a cave or just a damp mouldy property with no sun.

          They get sick and need hospitalisation due to their choices; but the rest of us get to pay for the care they require.

          If we remove the choice for them to live like this, maybe the costs on the rest of us will be lighter ?

          Comment


          • #6
            My point is applicable to self managing LLs to a much lesser degree. Unless they’re neglecting regular inspections of course.

            I haven’t seen last nights episode yet but last weeks one highlights it. Tenant complains to PM about various issues. PM passes job to contractor. Contractor carries out some work and bills PM. This is where everyone’s assumptions kick in. Tenant assumes PM/LL will get around to or dosent care about outstanding work. PM assumes contractor completed all tasks and there’s no outstanding problems. LL sees contractors bill and assumes PM is on top of property maintenance. Meanwhile potential damage is on going.

            Yes, the tenant should keep complaining but most don’t. PM should check contractors work and that tenant is happy but not all do. LL shouldn’t live blissfully ignorant but how many check?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Perry View Post
              That tenants choice is the thing I see under threat, now. If a person willingly chooses that sort of lifestyle because it suits them for whatever reason, where do the loony Labour comrade commissariat do-gooder airheads, drongos, academics and sycophants get off, telling such tenants that they can't live like that?

              Originally posted by Nice View Post
              So the tenants choose to live like this; 'this' being any form of sub standard residence, be it a cave or just a damp mouldy property with no sun.

              They get sick and need hospitalisation due to their choices; but the rest of us get to pay for the care they require.

              If we remove the choice for them to live like this, maybe the costs on the rest of us will be lighter ?
              Who said that? A single person, gainfully employed, happy and comfortable in a non-damp, non-mouldy, quite sanitary, non-cave situation that gets some sun each day and sleeping in a caravan outside.

              Given that leap of presumptions of yours, Nice, I suspect that a vocation as a spin doctor with Dhil Twitford beckons.

              Besides, the problem you describe is cart before the horse.

              It's taxpayer-funded, no-fault health care that's the real problem in your scenario, rather than housing.

              Comment

              Working...
              X