Letting property myself

You will need to inform your insurance company you are no longer an owner occupier and have the policy changed to a landlords policy. Tenants are responsible for insuring their own contents. Take readings on day of occupancy and change utilities to tenants name.

Use an excellent lease template. Having tenants sign the lease in a solicitor's office adds gravitas. (I'm not a solicitor, nor in the trade).

A decent template lease that follows the Residential Tenancies Act is fine. Bear in mind they are effectively six year leases with a six month probation period and FOR NOW limited break clauses; this may change. The tenant can leave at anytime with notice however.

Go with your gut in relation to tenants. If something seems up it usually is. Make sure you do your due diligence. You can cross reference their employer with bank statements and an employers reference. You should also look for someone who has rented before and has being paying their LL through direct debit. You can cross reference this and the LL reference to a lesser extent on the bank statement.

Finally remember you're supplying a service and treat the tenants as you would want to be treated.

On tax I hope you've done the maths - but as you specifically asked this to be excluded I'll not labour the point.

4ensic15 wrote: »

You need to familiarise yourself with the Housing Standards regulations for rented dwellings and your obligations as a landlord under the RTA. You should read the tribunal reports on the RTB website.

Agree. And the regulations can change overnight. You have to be on top of it.. OP you might want to consider a good letting agent. I'm an accidental landlord and have also worked in property for 25 yrs and I use a letting agent. Being a LL is serious and expensive business and needs a thorough understanding and professionalism.

Pkiernan wrote: »

Leases do not help landlords.

Why is that?

In any other situation, when two parties agree to certain terms and conditions if one party then breaks the agreement or contract, there are some consequences for example in an employment contract.

Why is it different for tenancy agreements? Is it better for a landlord not to have a lease agreement and rely on the RTB if there is a problem?

(I am not a legal person so I'm just thinking of a typical contract that nearly everyone has for their job)

Fian wrote: »

1: Because tenants are generally not a mark for damages and not worth pursuing in respect of any liabilities they may have under the lease.

2. Because you cannot contract out of the legislation - so for example you cannot agree that a lease will terminate in 12 monts and that the landlord will be entitled to a return of the property. Nor can you agree that the notice period set out in legislaiton for termination will be reduced to an agreed upon amount. Nor can you agree that the Landlord will be permitted to revise rent upwards to market rent after a specified period. Freedom to contract has been over=-ridden by the legislation.

3. However a lease does bind the landlord where it oeprates the other way - the lease can bind the landlord to longer periods than the statutory provisions.

It seems to be getting more like employment law - that changes very often and employers can't contract out of it.
There's a huge amount of regulation and I've never heard of any employer chasing an employee for damages - it could happen .

There are specified notice periods, minimum rates of pay and a whole host of other things a business has to comply with for employees. Also, it can be difficult to remove an employee that is not performing.

Of course a business does not hand over a property valued at hundreds of thousands to an employee...

what is the answer as it seems the current situation is causing more problems than solutions.