UK Landlord Forum / Life

Hi there

I am new to the forum, so apologies if this isn't the right place, but I just want to sound out some advice.

I am a single property tenant, its my old house and is a late 90's 'new' build on an estate. I rent the property via an agent as I now no longer live in the area.

*** Modified OP as I realise this is a public forum and I don't want to be too obvious ***

A lot houses like mine have gas 'feature' real flame fires. I have British Gas Home Cover  so annually they service the boiler, the gas fire and the hob. I had the annual inspection done on Saturday just and my tenant text me to say the results weren't good. She said,

QuoteThe gas fire is terminal and needs replacing as he showed me that smoke was escaping into the room and not up the chimney from the left hand corner.  This I know will be at a cost but I do use the fire during the winter as my sofa backs up against the radiator and the layout of the lounge is the only way it can be.
The outside vent needs replacing.

She then attached a scan of some dreadfully written paperwork from British Gas that just has scrawled on it " Flue Terminal". I need to clarify all of the above with British Gas as I am somewhat skeptical about their report. I had my Gas Safety Certificate inspection back in May using the agents Gas Safe contractors and none of these points were raised (only 6 months ago). Admittedly the gas fire is probably the original from when the house was built in 1998, and the model is obsolete so I appreciate it could be on its way out.

My issue is that I have had to pay out so many niggly things this year my tenant keeps finding, so I am not really making any profit on my property. Once the mortgage, the agents fees, insurances etc come out, I am not left with much other than what I put aside for tax purposes. I simply cannot afford a big cost outlay at the moment which potentially this could be. What I am considering is rather than replacing the fire, and potentially having to pay out for a new gas appliance, another safety check, possibly repair work done to the chimney... is capping off the gas, removing the fire and sealing up the hole with a replacement stone front. (Annoyingly I had new carpets put in last year which surround the hearth so my only choice really would be to leave the mantle surround as a "feature" otherwise there'd be a big gap in the carpet if removed). I would rather remove the thing and pay to have it sealed up.

What I am unsure about is, am I legally obliged to replace the fire simply because "she uses it in the winter" now and again? Am I within my rights to cap it off and remove it? Technically I don't think its an appliance like a hob or my old fridge she uses?? Also the house has Gas Central Heating as the primary heat source, and her reasoning that she uses it because her sofa is in front of one of two radiators in the room doesn't seem valid to me. When I lived there I had my sofa in the same place, albeit not touching the rads, and the house was never cold (plus its a mid terrace so is insulated well). My agent has agreed its a bit of a grey area and out it to me that maybe she only took the house because of the fire (I just know she will say that!). Does anyone know where I stand on this? I just know she is going to be difficult about this, but she seems to think I have a bottomless pit of money. I am just trying to look for the most cost effective solution long term.

Sorry for the long convoluted message... any advice welcomed!

Not really, you let the property with a working fire - removing that (capping it) would be diminishing the property... something for which a rent reduction might be requested. Remember, the winter (or cold weather) can last a long time... like at least a quarter of a full year. If the Tenant is interested in losing it for a rent reduction maybe you could negotiate... but it doesn't help you that much.

The fact that you cannot afford any outlay at this moment in time is neither here nor there. You must maintain a war chest for maintenance. What if the boiler needed replacing at your cost? What if storm Zebedee came along and left a hole in the roof? You don't ever get to opt out of repairs because your funds aren't in a great position. It seems to me, at least, that your thinking here is somewhat in the wrong... kinda morally if nothing else. No offence... but you're attempting to rationalise reducing the facilities within your let property because it's rather convenient. Maybe we don't know the whole story, but it doesn't seem as if the Tenant is doing anything wrong and these are your words we're reading.

Sorry.

The benefit of a paying Tenant who is attentive to your property could be perceived as a boon. As long as you are clear what is a defect that needs rectifying and what is an improvement you should be fine.

I see your point and I do have a 'war chest' fund as you rightly say, plus I have been very prompt in fixing, repairing, installing and dealing with any of the issues in the property thus far. God forbid if the boiler went, I would just have to suck it up and deal with it... I fully understand that. I have insurance in place for catastrophic outcomes and boiler cover which would be a substantial outlay otherwise. Technically I didn't let the property with a working fire as when she took out the tenancy agreement and moved in, the fire had been capped off at the time by British Gas due to their regulations that it needed to be fully attached to the surround, a defect that I rectified. (I wish I'd just removed the damn thing then). The fire was reinstated the following year when the next annual service check took place.

My tenant has been somewhat demanding from the word go and my agents haven't been that supportive in helping me deal with her. Like I say, the only plus is that she looks after the place and pays her rent on time, but sometimes she stresses me out how she approaches me about things. I wouldn't get rid of a tenant purely based on personality when they are looking after the house, so I know I just have to deal with it.

My main reason for asking re the fire was that it isn't the Primary heating in the property, therefore I feel I should be able to remove it if its a safety concern. Its not like I'm ripping out the central heating. I can't really negotiate on a rent reduction as she is already paying well under the market rate due to a combination of her demanding she cannot possibly pay more and a complete cock up on my agents part due to lack of communication with all parties. That said, I know it's common sometimes to let the rent stay the same for a couple of years for the benefit of keeping a long term tenant, so I accepted this after much thought. But this also means, I am now taking in less funds, so no, I don't want to reduce the rent any more.

Once I speak with British Gas, I may have a better idea of what I'm dealing with.

Quote from: flora1972 on October 23, 2018, 09:39:09 AMTechnically I didn't let the property with a working fire as when she took out the tenancy agreement and moved in, the fire had been capped off at the time by British Gas due to their regulations that it needed to be fully attached to the surround, a defect that I rectified. (I wish I'd just removed the damn thing then).

Here's your get-out.

If the facts are indisputable that you let the property without a working gas fire, then you're not removing something that the Tenant saw at the viewing and wanted, you're actually re-instating something to how it was at the time of let... admittedly, you did go and make an improvement... or betterment in the meantime, which confuses things. I guess the question might be... how soon after the current tenancy, was it immediately? I mean the Tenant has a point, I know you see that. It's still taking something away as it currently stands (the technicality is that you added that mid-tenancy).

The truth is - for taxation and stuff like that - you're not really supposed to improve the situation in let properties, like do upgrades and stuff... you maintain and repair.

We all fall into the trap, though.

I think I'd swallow the fire cost, and then start to take a more hard line with the gripes and concerns the Tenant has. You don't have to respond to everything, that is a fact - because some things will undoubtedly be improvements or upgrades... changing it from how it was when it was let... if the Tenant doesn't like your decision then they can vote with their feet... but - I stress - a Tenant who's got an eagle-eye about problems that are real isn't a bad thing... at least Tenant wouldn't fail to tell you about that little mark on the ceiling... before it becomes a sagging bubble and before the ceiling falls down and there's water all over.

Right?

If you not raised the rent due to cock-ups... it doesn't mean you can't do it now... there's the ability to do it via agreement (the fact the Tenant has not had a pay rise is neither here nor there to you) or enforce it via a Section 13. As long as it's reasonable then it can't really be challenged effectively - and if it is challenged it's work for the Tenant (or, again, the Tenant can leave).

Serving a Section 13 to introduce, say something modest, like a 2% to 5% increase, might regain some control for you too.

What is the rent currently? What do you think the market rate is?

I think your tenant may have got the wrong end of the stick. "Flue terminal" is just the bit on the end of the flue pipe, i.e. the outside vent. It doesn't mean that the gas fire is terminal, as in knackered.

Hippogriff

I see your point about the tenant being vigilant. I agree, I would much rather she did point out stuff sooner (which she does) than sit on it til it becomes a bigger issue. It's just how she goes about it sometimes that really stresses me out. As I said, my agents, since merging with a larger group, don't seem quite as proactive in getting things sorted quickly and their communication is sometimes problematic. That said, the tenant and I have a better relationship now, than what I felt we had in the beginning when she seemed to have a drama about every little thing, so who knows maybe it'll become easier in time. She wants to be there long term so it's a steady income for me in that respect.

Rental properties in the area for my style of house are currently around the £1200pcm value which is probably slightly high in my opinion, but I'd say a fair amount would be around the £1100 mark. When it was marketed in 2017 before she moved in, my agents advertised it (after discussion with me) at that amount and she negotiated down to £1000 because she didn't have use of the garage for a few months (in a separate block away from the house) as I was using it as storage whilst myself and my partner were moving house. So when the amount of £1050 was proposed this year, I thought it was reasonable figure considering she wants to be there long term. But you'd have thought I'd asked for another £500 quid a month from the reaction and response I got. Like you said, the fact the Tenant has not had a pay rise is neither here nor there. It just concerns me a little that there was no willingness to negotiate at all, even to say £25 pcm extra. It was just a flat 'No, I can't afford it'. My agents were pretty useless in fighting my corner so in the end, the 2nd year TA went ahead and I agreed to leave the rent the same for another year with the caveat that she has to expect reasonable rent rises in future. She has at least agreed to this, but I forsee issues in future I really do.

Simon Pambin

Thanks for your input. On further inspection, the scribbled piece of paper she attached in the message relates to the boiler, not the fire. As far as I know they HAVEN'T capped the fire off, so I really need to do some digging with British gas before I make a decision as its really not clear what the issue is. For all I know she's made a mountain out of a molehill on this and I've panicked over nothing.

Anyway guys thanks for your advice, really appreciate it. I'm not in this for any kind of profit really, i just want my house to be a bit of a nest egg in future and the mortgage to get paid. Just hate the stress of it sometimes!

PS - British Gas's website is down - how helpful! 

First off, stop renewing every year - let it go to SPT. That will benefit you.

Secondly, it's better to negotiate a rent increase but you can enforce it. I have certainly written to Tenants in the past along the line of - "Dear Fred, from the 1st of July the monthly rent will increase by £20, a modest rise of x%, please can you ensure your standing order is updated." - not even ending it with a question mark, deliberately.

Quote from: Hippogriff on October 23, 2018, 10:50:04 PM
First off, stop renewing every year - let it go to SPT. That will benefit you.

Secondly, it's better to negotiate a rent increase but you can enforce it. I have certainly written to Tenants in the past along the line of - "Dear Fred, from the 1st of July the monthly rent will increase by £20, a modest rise of x%, please can you ensure your standing order is updated." - not even ending it with a question mark, deliberately.

HG, What are the pros and cons of doing this rather than issuing say a Form 4 (Landlord's Notice proposing a new rent under an Assured Periodic Tenancy of premises situated in England.) ?

Aren't you obliged to mention Tribunals when rent is raised like this ?

Quote from: Martha on October 24, 2018, 09:44:23 AM

Quote from: Hippogriff on October 23, 2018, 10:50:04 PM
First off, stop renewing every year - let it go to SPT. That will benefit you.

Secondly, it's better to negotiate a rent increase but you can enforce it. I have certainly written to Tenants in the past along the line of - "Dear Fred, from the 1st of July the monthly rent will increase by £20, a modest rise of x%, please can you ensure your standing order is updated." - not even ending it with a question mark, deliberately.

HG, What are the pros and cons of doing this rather than issuing say a Form 4 (Landlord's Notice proposing a new rent under an Assured Periodic Tenancy of premises situated in England.) ?
Aren't you obliged to mention Tribunals when rent is raised like this?

Am I able to change it to an SPT when using an agent? My tenant has assured me she wants to be there long term (her child has started secondary school in the area). I think she will definitely be there 6-8 years+. My agents usually renegotiate every year and charge me £90 at the end/start of each year.

Martha, what does your tribunals comment mean?

Quote from: flora1972 on October 24, 2018, 10:54:41 AM

Quote from: Martha on October 24, 2018, 09:44:23 AM

Quote from: Hippogriff on October 23, 2018, 10:50:04 PM
First off, stop renewing every year - let it go to SPT. That will benefit you.

Secondly, it's better to negotiate a rent increase but you can enforce it. I have certainly written to Tenants in the past along the line of - "Dear Fred, from the 1st of July the monthly rent will increase by £20, a modest rise of x%, please can you ensure your standing order is updated." - not even ending it with a question mark, deliberately.

HG, What are the pros and cons of doing this rather than issuing say a Form 4 (Landlord's Notice proposing a new rent under an Assured Periodic Tenancy of premises situated in England.) ?
Aren't you obliged to mention Tribunals when rent is raised like this?

Am I able to change it to an SPT when using an agent? My tenant has assured me she wants to be there long term (her child has started secondary school in the area). I think she will definitely be there 6-8 years+. My agents usually renegotiate every year and charge me £90 at the end/start of each year.

Martha, what does your tribunals comment mean?

See
https://www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/first-tier-tribunal-property-chamber

Quote from: flora1972Am I able to change it to an SPT when using an agent? My tenant has assured me she wants to be there long term (her child has started secondary school in the area). I think she will definitely be there 6-8 years+. My agents usually renegotiate every year and charge me £90 at the end/start of each year.

Your Agent will love charging you the £90. The Agent may also be charging the Tenant something similar (or more) to renew. If you allow the AST to transition to SPT then there is no renewal fee due, from anyone. And the SPT has all terms, conditions and obligations as the AST had - because the SPT just arises automatically when the fixed term of the AST is reached - it is not a separate thing. The difference is notice periods... in a fixed term it's a fixed term, that provides security for both parties. With SPT it is at least 2 months from Landlord to Tenant and at least 1 month from Tenant to Landlord... and it just perpetuates itself.

It seems, to me, that if your Tenant is planning on being there for years any [theoretical] risk to you is extremely low. In fact, you may have a happier Tenant on your hands.

Typical Landlord scenario is as follows... start of tenancy, 6 month AST (fixed term), auto-transition to SPT (same document, no need to fiddle with Deposits etc.).

Quote from: Martha on October 24, 2018, 09:44:23 AMAren't you obliged to mention Tribunals when rent is raised like this ?

I'm not recommending a Section 13 above agreement. Certainly not. And, if you use a Section 13, you absolutely must make a Tenant aware of all their options. Do things by the book. But if you are increasing the rent by a modest amount, especially after not increasing it for a while, then there - in reality - is little anyone can really do about it, Tribunal or not. It has to be considered "excessive"... and, even then, the Tribunal is most likely to reduce the excess, not cancel the increase altogether... but it's a lot of admin. for someone to do and if - in their own minds - they can see the increase is modest and reasonable, they'll typically just accept it.

No-one [Tenant] likes a rent increase... goes without saying.

OP's situation... properties being let for £1,200; fair assessment of potential is £1,100... current rent is £1,000... proposal to go to £1,050 rejected. £50 per month is only £600 per year at the end of the day... roughly £360 after tax (assumed). I would approach this differently at this stage...

I would try to save money on the Agent's fees (Landlord and Tenant, if so)... thereby the grateful Tenant might be more amenable to a modest rent increase - maybe the £1,025... to get the ball rolling. You never know. It seems no action really needs to be taken. Just my view - the OP has said the relationship is getting better, somewhat.

Hi - did you get to the bottom of the flue situation with B Gas? was it just the terminal that needed replacing?..........  the rent increase is a difficult one.. I am struggling with setting this in motion - I have good/great tenants who pay on time and look after the property like you wouldn't believe, so makes increasing the rent so much more difficult...but its been 4 years now and no increase and yes I have had to spend money on things like boiler replacement which wiped all profit for a year...  others have pointed out its good that the tenant reports issues rather than leaving it to get worse state of repair - have to agree.

Start doing a modest annual increase on the tenancy anniversary. £10 or £20 per month, 2% or 3%, something that no-one could suggest is unreasonable. The Tenants will then start to expect it. However, as an incentive to attract Tenants who wish to stay longer I have started to agree things like no rent increases for the first 2 years... it has been working. This is often a better negotiating tactic before the tenancy starts than accepting any initial haggle - which obviously drops your rent by a modest amount. I'm not against a good haggle.

I don't have a hard and fast rule about rent increases,it depends on the tenant.Recently had a tenant move after 12 years,and I only raised rent a few times by modest amounts.It was still below local rates by the time he left,but very few problems,rent on the dot every month.If I raise the rent it is only  by the amounts mentioned above,and I never had anyone refuse.You need to be flexible,and at the end of the day, receiving  regular rent from a decent tenant outweighs even a short void .