Too good to be true?

[sbedvek]

Thanks guys

[westminster]

This sounds perfect for me as I'm borderline desperate to get someone in and they are able to move in next week. Is this too good to be true?

Doesn't strike me as anything unusual; if anything, I'd say 15% extra is a bit low for a short let. Just do the usual credit checks, and check that the T's house is in their name on the Land Registry (costs £4 online).

[mind the gap]

If a builder has told them it will take three months, assume they will be there for six anyway.

A (relatively trusted) agent has just called me and told me about an elderly couple who want a house for three months whilst their house is being refurbished.

They are able to pay up front for the three months and the agent feels that he is able to extract up to 15% more than my monthly asking price because of the inconvenience of the short tenancy along with the estate agents fees.

This sounds perfect for me as I'm borderline desperate to get someone in and they are able to move in next week. Is this too good to be true?

I agree with others that you should meet the prospective tenants, preferably in their property.

If you are satisfied that these people are genuine, etc., I would do all the normal checks as I would do for any other tenant but in addition, I would have a property lawyer draw up the tenancy agreement, so that it includes provisions for what happens if the tenants don't wish to leave after 3 months.

If you consult a property lawyer, he/she may advise you not to agree to such a short let.

Don't forget that if you wanted them to leave before 6 months, you would have to wait until 6 months had expired before any action to evict them could take effect.

[fletchj]

This is the sort of story that may or may not be on the level, in this case there would seem to be a simple way to confirm the story.

If they are on the level they will live locally so you could get their name and address and 'drop round' to discuss the tenancy. It should be fairly straight forward to see whether they are actually doing up a house.

[mjbfire]

If you can humm it, i sing it

[mind the gap]

I would say.

Do everything as you would along term let, credit cheques refs, etc.
Don't accept a lump sum, a monthly direct debit, is better in case they don't move on. And take the same deposit as you normally would.

And it depends, if you mind, if they don't move out when they say they are.
If it going to cause you a problem if they don't move, then Don't Do It, if you don't mind when they move out, then Why Not go for it.
But I would get the agent to serve S8(G1), just in case.

Is this a poem?

[mjbfire]

I would say.

Do everything as you would along term let, credit cheques refs, etc.
Don't accept a lump sum, a monthly direct debit, is better in case they don't move on. And take the same deposit as you normally would.

And it depends, if you mind, if they don't move out when they say they are.
If it going to cause you a problem if they don't move, then Don't Do It, if you don't mind when they move out, then Why Not go for it.
But I would get the agent to serve S8(G1), just in case.

[jeffrey]

Is this too good to be true?

Things that sound too good to be true usually are just that.

[Planner]

an elderly couple......agent feels that he is able to extract up to 15% more than my monthly asking price

What a Nice Agent.

[sbedvek]

A (relatively trusted) agent has just called me and told me about an elderly couple who want a house for three months whilst their house is being refurbished.

They are able to pay up front for the three months and the agent feels that he is able to extract up to 15% more than my monthly asking price because of the inconvenience of the short tenancy along with the estate agents fees.

This sounds perfect for me as I'm borderline desperate to get someone in and they are able to move in next week. Is this too good to be true?