Renting house, extra tenants, extra money?

sweetie

I'm renting out a three (double) bed property on daft and am getting a lot of enquiries from families and groups of four or five people. I have it advertised as looking for three people ideally but have a very interested party of 4 adults and 1 child. I may go with these but am wondering is it fair to ask for a little extra per month (<10%) considering the extra two people and wear and tear on the property that will be involved.

djimi

Surely a property with three double rooms is expecting 6 people?

D3PO

sweetie wrote: »

I'm renting out a three (double) bed property on daft and am getting a lot of enquiries from families and groups of four or five people. I have it advertised as looking for three people ideally but have a very interested party of 4 adults and 1 child. I may go with these but am wondering is it fair to ask for a little extra per month (<10%) considering the extra two people and wear and tear on the property that will be involved.

Absolutely. You should be trying to make as high a yield as possible anyway, if they are willing to pay more then its fair game.

sweetie

djimi wrote: »

Surely a property with three double rooms is expecting 6 people?

three double beds, most single tenants ideally expect a double bed these days. more comfortable and handy for when they have their partner stay over or get lucky!

djimi

sweetie wrote: »

three double beds, most single tenants ideally expect a double bed these days. more comfortable and handy for when they have their partner stay over or get lucky!

Point still stands though; if you advertise a house with three double rooms then surely you must expect to get three couples (ie 6 people) applying.

Personally I dont think its fair or right to expect four adults and a kid to pay more than three adults for the same property, and I would expect most, if not all applicants, to tell you to take hike when asked to pay 10% more than the asking price when reasonable expectation is that the property as advertised will meet their needs.

The advertised asking price for a three double bedroom property should be taking into account wear and tear of 6 people. If you happen to get three single people to rent and the reduced wear and tear that comes with that then that is a bonus.

sweetie

I advertised looking for three professionals but people ring to arrange a viewing and then when they arrive their circumstances are different. Most houses with two or three double bedrooms wouldnt physically have enough living space for 4/6 people. It's basically a way of showing that the rooms are big (enough for a tenant and a guest) not that you want that many people to rent it. I take your point though, thanks.

D3PO

djimi wrote: »

Personally I dont think its fair or right to expect four adults and a kid to pay more than three adults for the same property, and I would expect most, if not all applicants, to tell you to take hike when asked to pay 10% more than the asking price when reasonable expectation is that the property as advertised will meet their needs.

.

That could be flipped the other way to Djimi.

Is it fair or right for people to enquire about a rental that is advertised at a price and ask to pay 10% less than the asking price ?


Of course its fair. Weather it happens or not is another story but negotiation over the rental price is a two way street. They are either willing to pay it or not, if they do they do if they don't then the OP decides what their next move is.

djimi

D3PO wrote: »

That could be flipped the other way to Djimi.

Is it fair or right for people to enquire about a rental that is advertised at a price and ask to pay 10% less than the asking price ?

Haggling down on an advertised price is something that happens in all walks of life, and indeed in a lot of cases the advertised price will have some room built in for this very reason. For a seller to turn around and ask for more than the asking price is not the done thing; only in exceptional circumstances will a buyer ever expect to be asked to pay more than the advertised price. This, in my opinion, is not an execptional circumstance.

D3PO wrote: »

Of course its fair. Weather it happens or not is another story but negotiation over the rental price is a two way street. They are either willing to pay it or not, if they do they do if they don't then the OP decides what their next move is.

I really dont agree that negotiation is a two way street; the asking price is, generally speaking, the upper limit of what the seller expects to get. Of course the OP is entitled to ask for whatever they want from a potential tenant on the day of viewing, but I would very much expect the overwhelming majority of tenants to turn around and walk away immediately. I would see it as being cheeky in the extreme to be asked for more money for a property that meets my needs as advertised.

djimi

sweetie wrote: »

I advertised looking for three professionals but people ring to arrange a viewing and then when they arrive their circumstances are different. Most houses with two or three double bedrooms wouldnt physically have enough living space for 4/6 people. It's basically a way of showing that the rooms are big (enough for a tenant and a guest) not that you want that many people to rent it. I take your point though, thanks.

I suppose if you advertised it specifically as being for three people then thats a bit different and you can say that the conditions of the rental have changed and you may need to change the price to reflect that (in much the same as if they asked for a 6 month lease instead of a year).

The Spider

djimi wrote: »

Point still stands though; if you advertise a house with three double rooms then surely you must expect to get three couples (ie 6 people) applying.

Personally I dont think its fair or right to expect four adults and a kid to pay more than three adults for the same property, and I would expect most, if not all applicants, to tell you to take hike when asked to pay 10% more than the asking price when reasonable expectation is that the property as advertised will meet their needs.

The advertised asking price for a three double bedroom property should be taking into account wear and tear of 6 people. If you happen to get three single people to rent and the reduced wear and tear that comes with that then that is a bonus.

Depends on where the house is located and what the rental market is like, couple of things really, absolutely charge more for a group of adults, if you have the choice don't rent to three couples, that's a recipe for disaster.

I doubt there's three kitchens and three sitting rooms, and unless it's a giant house they'll be at each others throats in no time, one couple will want to watch tv and their own time, I'd say you'd be looking for more tenants inside six months.

4 adults and one kid, I'd be wary of unless it was a family with two adult children.

Ideal tenants for this type of property would be a family, they'd be more likely to treat it as their home, and would be more likely to stay longer than a year, there also won't be the shared kitchen sitting room issues that will arise with adults sharing. Adults don't want to be in a situation where they have to share with others, they're doing it because they can't afford their own place, or don't want to spend a lot on rent.

I'd go at asking on the family, any shared accommodation I'd squeeze them for as much as I can get, because more than likely they don't intend to be in the situation for very long.

D3PO

djimi wrote: »

Haggling down on an advertised price is something that happens in all walks of life, and indeed in a lot of cases the advertised price will have some room built in for this very reason. For a seller to turn around and ask for more than the asking price is not the done thing; only in exceptional circumstances will a buyer ever expect to be asked to pay more than the advertised price. This, in my opinion, is not an execptional circumstance.



I really dont agree that negotiation is a two way street; the asking price is, generally speaking, the upper limit of what the seller expects to get. Of course the OP is entitled to ask for whatever they want from a potential tenant on the day of viewing, but I would very much expect the overwhelming majority of tenants to turn around and walk away immediately. I would see it as being cheeky in the extreme to be asked for more money for a property that meets my needs as advertised.

OP asked for professionals. Doesn't sound like 4 professionals to me therefore I see no problem with the negotiation based on the demographic being different than what the OP sought.

The same way Id see no issue with a change in the asking rent it if they wanted to have a pet when the OP said in the ad no pets, or if the LL found he had 30 tenants to chose from or so on so forth.

LL's should be professional in how they deal with tenants but being professional also means they should look to yield what the market will bear in terms of rent.

I take your point re upper limits etc, but theres nothing unfair in the OP requesting more.

Like I said the prospective tenant doesn't have to agree to the new terms on offer if they don't want to.

sweetie

Renting is a bit different to selling something. I am leasing something for a particular use and they have changed the conditions of that use by changing the numbers from 3 to 5. Now, I think that I will let them take it at the advertised price but in future will specify in an ad that it would be this price for x amount of people and another price for x+y amount. BTW When one goes to a hotel there is a rate for single, double and triple occupancy usually.

In response to The spider: They are foreign nationals, who I think have lived together elsewhere for a couple of years at least and two of them are siblings and the child is schoolgoing age so I'd be confident of longer than a year if it suits both parties. I believe at
least three of the adults are working.

djimi

D3PO wrote: »

OP asked for professionals. Doesn't sound like 4 professionals to me therefore I see no problem with the negotiation based on the demographic being different than what the OP sought.

The same way Id see no issue with a change in the asking rent it if they wanted to have a pet when the OP said in the ad no pets or so on so forth.

I take your point re upper limits etc, but theres nothing unfair in the OP requesting more.

Like I said the prospective tenant doesn't have to agree to the new terms on offer if they don't want to.

To be honest I replied to your post before I read the part about the property being advertised as being for 3 professionals (something that was not mentioned in the first post). That being the case I agree with you; if there is a change to the advertised conditions of the rental then for the most part its not unreasonable to expect a change in the advertised cost of rental.

D3PO

sweetie wrote: »

Renting is a bit different to selling something. I am leasing something for a particular use and they have changed the conditions of that use by changing the numbers from 3 to 5. Now, I think that I will let them take it at the advertised price but in future will specify in an ad that it would be this price for x amount of people and another price for x+y amount. BTW When one goes to a hotel there is a rate for single, double and triple occupancy usually.

if you think they will pay 10% more and it wont impact you by having revolving door tenants then your crazy not to get the 10% more.

Its money out of your pocket at the end of the day.

djimi

sweetie wrote: »

Renting is a bit different to selling something. I am leasing something for a particular use and they have changed the conditions of that use by changing the numbers from 3 to 5. Now, I think that I will let them take it at the advertised price but in future will specify in an ad that it would be this price for x amount of people and another price for x+y amount. BTW When one goes to a hotel there is a rate for single, double and triple occupancy usually.

Agreed. I assumed you advertised it as a 3 double bedroom house, in which case its not unreasonable to expect three couples to look to rent. If you specificed the number of tenants in the ad then thats a different matter.

sweetie

It was advertised for three in the text but the ad wizard in daft also asks what type of rooms they are so when you go and look at the ad from a renter's perspective it could be construed as 3+. Something I'll know the next time!

odds_on

djimi wrote: »

Haggling down on an advertised price is something that happens in all walks of life, and indeed in a lot of cases the advertised price will have some room built in for this very reason. For a seller to turn around and ask for more than the asking price is not the done thing; only in exceptional circumstances will a buyer ever expect to be asked to pay more than the advertised price. This, in my opinion, is not an execptional circumstance.



I really dont agree that negotiation is a two way street; the asking price is, generally speaking, the upper limit of what the seller expects to get. Of course the OP is entitled to ask for whatever they want from a potential tenant on the day of viewing, but I would very much expect the overwhelming majority of tenants to turn around and walk away immediately. I would see it as being cheeky in the extreme to be asked for more money for a property that meets my needs as advertised.

Earlier this year I wanted to view a property at a very reasonable price, only to be told by the EA that the price was put especially low to attract potential clients and that it would go to the highest bidder.

Having heard that, I immediately declined even to view the property.

djimi

odds_on wrote: »

Earlier this year I wanted to view a property at a very reasonable price, only to be told by the EA that the price was put especially low to attract potential clients and that it would go to the highest bidder.

Having heard that, I immediately declined even to view the property.

You would hope that everyone else who viewed the property did likewise. Scumbag tactic really; simply wasting peoples time.

D3PO

djimi wrote: »

You would hope that everyone else who viewed the property did likewise. Scumbag tactic really; simply wasting peoples time.

Its not really though. If you reread the last post the EA said they priced it low to get interest hoping for a bidding war that's a pretty standard tactic.

There is nothing to indicate that if the only offer was at the asking that it wouldn't be accepted.

agree though if it was a case of put at 300k asking with no intention to sell for less than say 400k or whatever its a horrible thing to do, but it happens with tyre kickers and people like Khards the other way around to.

P.S Djimi don't you be going down the route of moral outrage I mean its not illegal so its fair game right ? :pac::p;)

sweetie

D3PO wrote: »

Its not really though. If you reread the last post the EA said they priced it low to get interest hoping for a bidding war that's a pretty standard tactic.

There is nothing to indicate that if the only offer was at the asking that it wouldn't be accepted.

agree though if it was a case of put at 300k asking with no intention to sell for less than say 400k or whatever its a horrible thing to do, but it happens with tyre kickers and people like Khards the other way around to.

P.S Djimi don't you be going down the route of moral outrage I mean its not illegal so its fair game right ? :pac::p;)

I presume Odds on meant a property to let rather than for sale.

D3PO

sweetie wrote: »

I presume Odds on meant a property to let rather than for sale.

Oops that's my Friday brain not functioning

djimi

D3PO wrote: »

P.S Djimi don't you be going down the route of moral outrage I mean its not illegal so its fair game right ? :pac::p;)

:P

Whatever about when buying a house, you have to admit that its a pretty ****ty stunt to pull in the rental market. For the most part its just wasting peoples time.

D3PO

djimi wrote: »

:P

Whatever about when buying a house, you have to admit that its a pretty ****ty stunt to pull in the rental market. For the most part its just wasting peoples time.

I'm just busting your balls

djimi

D3PO wrote: »

I'm just busting your balls

I left myself open for it in fairness :pac:

odds_on

sweetie wrote: »

I presume Odds on meant a property to let rather than for sale.

Actually it was for sale - but I wouldn'y put it passed an EA to do it in lettings.

Though I did view an apartment at the beginning of March - asking price 360 p.m - offered 300 and refused.

I see it is still for rent today.