Top

Landlords - this little mistake could cost you your home!


Updated on 26 January 2012 | 11 Comments

These homeowners-turned-landlords learnt a horrible lesson when they rented out their house!

There's an old expression among landlords: "Better an empty house than a bad tenant." In other words, it's preferable to have a few months of voids (when no rent is coming in) than to install a problematic tenant into your property.

Around 20 years ago, a friend of mine found out this valuable lesson the hard way. To disguise her identity, I will call her Mary. I met Mary in the late Eighties, when we worked at the same company.

An older, well-bred (and almost aristocratic) lady with a charming manner, Mary was a delight to work with. Through her family, she had social links to the Royal Family and, being comfortably well-off, she worked part time purely to occupy herself, rather than for money.

After a while, Mary decided to take a year off work and travel the world with her husband. Rather than leave her lovely home in Surrey empty for 12 months, she decided to rent it out to upmarket private tenants.

Through a private advertisement, Mary found two twenty-something chaps willing to pay the full rent she had advertised. Both men were graduates with good jobs in the City of London, so Mary happily headed off on her world excursion, confident that she had chosen top-class tenants.

An owner's nightmare

Unfortunately, Mary was very, very wrong!

Less than six months into her 12-month cruise, Mary received a desperate phone call from a neighbour. The neighbour's news was so disturbing that Mary cut short her holiday of a lifetime and flew 5,000 miles back to England.

What she found would leave a horrible, everlasting mark on her memory. Her beautiful home was practically destroyed.

As it turned out, her two well-spoken tenants were hedonists who loved to party. Although they paid their rent on time, they used Mary's house as a venue for a series of raucous raves. The partygoers at these events -- and the tenants themselves -- had all but reduced Mary's house to rubble.

Rubbish was strewn all over Mary's garden, including hypodermic syringes and other drug paraphernalia. Inside her home, the damage was even more destructive. Fixtures and fittings had been ripped out, doors had been kicked in, and there were holes in several walls. Following a fire, the main bedroom was completely burnt out.

In short, almost every feature of Mary's elegant, period property was damaged to some extent.

Insurance? What insurance?

By the time Mary arrived to take control of her home, her tenants had 'done a bunk' and were nowhere to be found. Therefore, Mary started the painful process of rebuilding her life and home by contacting the provider of her home insurance. Via its helpline, she patiently set out the extensive damage to the building and its contents.

Alas, Mary had made a disastrous error. Before leaving for her worldwide jaunt, she had failed to notify her insurer that her property was being rented out and was no longer owner-occupied.

As owners tend to look after their properties better than tenants do, insurance companies charge higher premiums for rented homes. What's more, home insurance policies sold to homeowners clearly state that they cover the owners, their immediate family and occasional guests, but not tenants. Indeed, most bog-standard home insurance policies become null and void as soon as a property is rented out.

As a result of Mary's non-disclosure, her insurer refused to consider her claim. Despite Mary's written protests (which included getting her MP involved), the company stuck to its guns, as it had a water-tight case.

Learn from Mary's mistake

Without a valid insurance policy, Mary had to use her life savings to restore her detached home to its former glory. The final bill for this restoration work came to more than £50,000. This payout left Mary and her husband much less financially stable than they were before embarking on their globe-trotting journey.

In summary, Mary learnt the hard way that becoming a temporary landlord is much trickier than it first appears. To protect yourself against falling foul of a similar situation, you should:

  • Consider using an established, professional letting agency to rent out your home. While these fees will cost you perhaps a tenth (10%) of the monthly rent, you can pursue the company if you lose out as a result of its actions. If you'd prefer to go it alone, make sure you get the right tenants - check out Landlords – pick the right tenant for a guide.
  • Ask for a substantial deposit to cover any damages incurred during the term of the tenancy. Ideally, this sum should be at least two to three months' rent.
  • Before letting out your house, you must inform your mortgage lender and insurance company that you intend to take in tenants. Otherwise, you may breach the terms of your home loan and invalidate your insurance!

More: Get quality quotes for home insurance | Where your pound is worth more in 2012 | Earn top cashback from credit cards

Most Recent


Comments



  • 31 October 2016

    Landlords should also do a detailed tenant screening on applicants. I mean not only credit and criminal reports, but also landlords’ references. As it’s mentioned in the article https://rentberry.com/blog/screening-prospective-tenants recommendations from previous landlords is an important step of tenant screening. So, you can call a property owner and ask a simple question: Would you rent to this person again? If someone asks Mary the same question concerning this tenant, I bet she answer will be anything but a “yes.

    REPORT This comment has been reported.
    0

  • 27 October 2016

    Landlords should also do a detailed tenant screening on applicants. I mean not only credit and criminal reports, but also landlords’ references. As it’s mentioned in the article https://rentberry.com/blog/screening-prospective-tenants recommendations from previous landlords is an important step of tenant screening. So, you can call a property owner and ask a simple question: Would you rent to this person again? If someone asks Mary the same question concerning this tenant, I bet she answer will be anything but a “yes.

    REPORT This comment has been reported.
    0

  • 16 February 2012

    In the article it is stated that the landlord can pursure the company (letting agency) if losses are incured. Can anyone provide any information on this and the best way to do this. My partner has just suffered as a result of non-paying tenants who have left the house in a moderately bad state. I believe that the agency she has used did not support her very well and appeared not to have taken an inventory of the house, nor inspected it on a periodic basis, which in my opinion could have prevented the extent of the damage and loss of rent that she has suffered. When coming to the point of evicting the tenants, the advice she was provided was of little use and too late in the proceedings. I cannot believe that they did not have set procedures/guidelines available to deal with this. I would assume that paying the letting agency would entail recieving some kind of service from them!! Obviously I was wrong. As a side note - why is it everyone assumes that any landlord has loads of money and can afford to support lazy, idle people who don't think of the third order effects of not paying rent? All we are doing is trying to secure our future and be sensible with our cash by investing it and working hard to make sure we have a nest egg to retire on as pensions are not doing very well and cannot be relied upon. I know there are also some bad examples of landlords out there but my tenant is great, he has done some very good work on my property and I have a very good relationship with him, and in return I make sure I provide him with a comfortable home and everything required.

    REPORT This comment has been reported.
    0

Do you want to comment on this article? You need to be signed in for this feature

Most Popular

Copyright © lovemoney.com All rights reserved.

 

loveMONEY.com Financial Services Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) with Firm Reference Number (FRN): 479153.

loveMONEY.com is a company registered in England & Wales (Company Number: 7406028) with its registered address at First Floor Ridgeland House, 15 Carfax, Horsham, West Sussex, RH12 1DY, United Kingdom. loveMONEY.com Limited operates under the trading name of loveMONEY.com Financial Services Limited. We operate as a credit broker for consumer credit and do not lend directly. Our company maintains relationships with various affiliates and lenders, which we may promote within our editorial content in emails and on featured partner pages through affiliate links. Please note, that we may receive commission payments from some of the product and service providers featured on our website. In line with Consumer Duty regulations, we assess our partners to ensure they offer fair value, are transparent, and cater to the needs of all customers, including vulnerable groups. We continuously review our practices to ensure compliance with these standards. While we make every effort to ensure the accuracy and currency of our editorial content, users should independently verify information with their chosen product or service provider. This can be done by reviewing the product landing page information and the terms and conditions associated with the product. If you are uncertain whether a product is suitable, we strongly recommend seeking advice from a regulated independent financial advisor before applying for the products.