renting my property, agent or to council

[steve2000]

I would like to rent my property out as i now need to buy something bigger. I have looked at using an agent or is it easier to lease to my local council or housing association. Any opinions would be appreciated on either of these options. The council seems less hassle in the way they take it off your hands.
many thanks

[RichieP]

All councils operate a different policy. Some manage it entirely and pay the market rent. Other just supply you the tenants and pay below market rent. If it's the former, go for it. Let someone else do all the work while you get your mortgage paid. If it's the latter, go through an agent, then think about managing it yourself once you've learnt a bit about how it all works.

[MrShed]

Karongo recently posted a good outline on his personal experience and views on the local authority/council route:

(2) I live well away from London, am not good at DIY, do not have the time to sort out ongoing maintenance problems. I heve specifically bought ex-local authority flats (and 1 house) in London and let them all to a Housing Association since last 3 years. There are advantages and dis-advantages.

Advantages:
(1) Get reasonably good rent. I consider these to be market value rent.
(2) No void periods in between tenancies
(3) No agents commission to pay
(4) Possible renewal of contract for a further 3 or 5 years
(5) Rent by Bank credit into my bank account like clockwork so I know that all loan repayments will be paid on time.
(6) HA is willing to arrange all repair work done. They will contact the workmen and the tenants and all I have to do is to pay the contractor's bill plus HA's 10% handling fee based on cost of each job. I do not have the worry of finding the workmen, liasing with the tenant and getting the work done.

Dis-advantages:

(1) I am still responsible for all repairs and maintenance. I pay approx £17pm to their nominated contractor for all gas maintenance and safety certificates work. I consider this good value for money. However, all other work, eg plumbing, electrical etc is notified to me if I want to do it myself or to authorise then to get it done through their regular contractors. these bills could be expensive (£100 to £200), but remember we are talking about London and also remember that you do not pay any commission to agents. the money saved on commissions is more than the cost of repair bills required to a property.

(2) Rent reviews are included in the contract but may not be much, if anything at all. However, may be this is due to the present rental market.

Overall conclusion:

I would have no hesitation to give to a Housing association so long as you are happy with the initial rent offered to you.

It is better to own a freehold house than a leasehold flat, especially an ex-local authority flat. These flats have some major works bills for the owners for work done by the freeholders, usually local councils.

I hope this helps.

Ramnik

[steve2000]

thanks for your advice i have contacted my local council and am awaiting a reply.

[p902]

Hello all

I have the same dilemma (if you can call it that). This is my first BTL. It is a leasehold flat.

I am planning to give it to the local council, but they don't deal directly with landlords anymore- they lease your property through a few (4) 'approved agents'.

I decided on the council as I was not able to find a Housing Association to take the property.

The agent I chose is offering me a fully managed 3 year lease at about £50/month below market value with the council. This is Ok by me 'cos if I let it out privately through an agent, I would getabout £15-£20/mth less than their offer by the time management fees etc are deducted.

One of the things bugging me is the fact that it is a 3 year lease and I am tied in for that period. The draft contract does not say anything about rent reviews within the lease period. If I let privately at least I have the option of increasing rent at the end of each tenancy.(?)

The main reason I am going for the council option is I am inexperienced and would like the hassle of managing my rentals (about to buy a second)taken off me till I get the hang of it. This way I know my mortgage is covered for the next three years.

Has anyone got experience of letting to a council through an agent? It's not a scam by the agent, I got their details from the council office itself.
I would also appreciate if anyone had any info on Housing associations that rent properties from private landlords in the East London area.

I await your replies with bated breath...

[homes4let]

Hi All

Just to make you all aware that the government have given all councils directions to reduce the use/management of leasing schemes by 50% by 2010for the sole reason that the cost of running the schemes is huge.

Ive been to a number of workshops run by local councils to look alternative methods of housing homesless families. I presume therefore that most councils wont be too proactive in marketing the leasing schemes from now on.

Regards

Darrel

[bluey]

Housing Association

I am a novice landlord, about to let out my family home, so investigated the private sector leasing scheme in my London borough. A property guide I bought indicated that they offered cash incentives to owners to take them on and paid competitive rent.

It initially seems like a good deal with benefits such as being completely hands-off and having guaranteed rent but my analysis indicated I would lose around 30-40% of the rental income on expenses associated with letting it to a social landlord.

I was visited by a local housing association officer who confirmed no cash incentive is available. The monthly rental offered did equal the equivalent market rent that I would receive from private letting agents less their fees and carried no risk as rent is guaranteed and not subject to void periods.

The HA officer confirmed that I would have to undertake numerous changes to comply with their health and safety policy which at a minimum would include taking away all shelves, filling in the pond, fitting wired in smoke detectors, removing all locks that are on bedroom doors, getting an electrical safety certificate. These upgrades are understandable but are above the legal standard required for private letting. I estimate these initial costs at £1000 and the HA will not compensate the landlord.

The HA officer confirmed that the house would be subject to significant wear and tear as it would be let to a family with children who are likely to be in receipt of HB and be present in the house 24/7. The HA would not hand it back in a decorated state or compensate the landlord for any decoration costs. I estimate that re-decoration would cost £1000.

The HA officer confirmed that it would have to be let fully furnished but would be handed back to me after the 3 or 5 year period without any furniture, nor would I be compensated for the loss of any of it. I estimate that the current furniture is worth £3000 and allowing for inflation, will then cost £3500 to replace. In addition, I am required to pay for a 3 star heating contract with British Gas that I estimate will cost £300 per annum and subject to higher insurance premium that I estimate at an extra £200 per annum.

A colleague who let her flat to a different HA reported that she had problems because it was handed back in very poor condition and they did not wish to compensate her for the cooker which was new upon the start of the tenancy and broken at handover (which she regarded as a repair that they were responsible for, not wear and tear). Another HA who I investigated also billed the Landlord management charges at the cost of one week rent per quarter so there is the potential to lose 8% of the income this way.

It's a shame really, as I was brought up in social housing and have empathy with their tenants but this option is not commercially viable for me.

[bluey]

Housing Association

I am a novice landlord, about to let out my family home, so investigated the private sector leasing scheme in my London borough. A property guide I bought indicated that they offered cash incentives to owners to take them on and paid competitive rent.

It initially seems like a good deal with benefits such as being completely hands-off and having guaranteed rent but my analysis indicated I would lose around 30-40% of the rental income on expenses associated with letting it to a social landlord.

I was visited by a local housing association officer who confirmed no cash incentive is available. The monthly rental offered did equal the equivalent market rent that I would receive from private letting agents less their fees and carried no risk as rent is guaranteed and not subject to void periods.

The HA officer confirmed that I would have to undertake numerous changes to comply with their health and safety policy which at a minimum would include taking away all shelves, filling in the pond, fitting wired in smoke detectors, removing all locks that are on bedroom doors, getting an electrical safety certificate. These upgrades are understandable but are above the legal standard required for private letting. I estimate these initial costs at £1000 and the HA will not compensate the landlord.

The HA officer confirmed that the house would be subject to significant wear and tear as it would be let to a family with children who are likely to be in receipt of HB and be present in the house 24/7. The HA would not hand it back in a decorated state or compensate the landlord for any decoration costs. I estimate that re-decoration would cost £1000.

The HA officer confirmed that it would have to be let fully furnished but would be handed back to me after the 3 or 5 year period without any furniture, nor would I be compensated for the loss of any of it. I estimate that the current furniture is worth £3000 and allowing for inflation, will then cost £3500 to replace. In addition, I am required to pay for a 3 star heating contract with British Gas that I estimate will cost £300 per annum and subject to higher insurance premium that I estimate at an extra £200 per annum.

A colleague who let her flat to a different HA reported that she had problems because it was handed back in very poor condition and they did not wish to compensate her for the cooker which was new upon the start of the tenancy and broken at handover (which she regarded as a repair that they were responsible for, not wear and tear). Another HA who I investigated also billed the Landlord management charges at the cost of one week rent per quarter so there is the potential to lose 8% of the income this way.

It's a shame really, as I was brought up in social housing and have empathy with their tenants but this option is not commercially viable for me.

[MrWoof]

I got started in the letting business by leasing to a London Borough. My experiences mirror those of Karongo, the only reason I sold the place after the 3 year term was up was Karongo's last point. It was an ex local authority place and they had the freehold, any work needed in the road was done by them and I had no input into costings. I was lucky, just after I sold it I saw scaffolding up for more than six months, just imagine the cost of that, also, in another area some leaseholders ended up with a £10k bill for a community centre they didn't want.

[SteveP]

In the dim and distant past I worked for a Housing Association in a role where maintaining properties leased from private sector landlords was my main role.

I personally would not lease to a HA on the basis that most offer. I have seen many very disappointed landlords have properties handed back in a far worse condition than when they were leased.

Few landlords have the resources to fight a HA over damages when the term ends, and HA's will not part with money readily.