Requests from tenants - built in
- Thread starter tez
- Start date
If a free standing unit is connected to the walls with angle brackets and dyna bolts on the inside of the wardrobe....would it not be a Built In Wardrobe??
Glenn
Here's a view from a tenant.
1. She's lucky in this market to even have a roof over her head.
2. It is not her home. It should never feel like home. Every agent we've had has always reminded us that we're renting a very expensive asset.
3. If she wants a built in she can put one in. She MUST leave it when she leaves. Otherwise it's quite clear, that's how it was when she signed the lease.
We wanted window locks when we moved into one place. Talked to the landlord and he was fine with it as long as we installed them and left him the keys when we left.
Got a little upset when our rent went up due to extra security but in the long run it protected our possessions from being stolen and his flat from being trashed a few weeks later when someone broke into one of the lockless flats.
1. She's lucky in this market to even have a roof over her head.
2. It is not her home. It should never feel like home. Every agent we've had has always reminded us that we're renting a very expensive asset.
3. If she wants a built in she can put one in. She MUST leave it when she leaves. Otherwise it's quite clear, that's how it was when she signed the lease.
We wanted window locks when we moved into one place. Talked to the landlord and he was fine with it as long as we installed them and left him the keys when we left.
Got a little upset when our rent went up due to extra security but in the long run it protected our possessions from being stolen and his flat from being trashed a few weeks later when someone broke into one of the lockless flats.
Thanks for the insight so far. Im sure it will help in my final decision which I will shoot off to the real estate agent in the next few days.
I will most likely end up with asking the tenant to cover half of the cost with the built in remaining when she moves out. Could I get her to sign something like this so there is no recourse later on claiming she is entitled to remove it or be paid out for it?
Thanks
I will most likely end up with asking the tenant to cover half of the cost with the built in remaining when she moves out. Could I get her to sign something like this so there is no recourse later on claiming she is entitled to remove it or be paid out for it?
Thanks
If you prefer to build the wardrobe, why not keep it simple and increase the rent to pay off the cost of the wardrobe in a reasonable time.
Many tenant would prefer a small monthly increase rather than a larger amount to pay.
Cheers,
Many tenant would prefer a small monthly increase rather than a larger amount to pay.
Cheers,
If a free standing unit is connected to the walls with angle brackets and dyna bolts on the inside of the wardrobe....would it not be a Built In Wardrobe??
Glenn
No. It would be a free standing unit connected to the walls with angle brackets and dyna bolts.
No. It would be a free standing unit connected to the walls with angle brackets and dyna bolts.
mmm...yes, a play on words
My guess is that the rental gain would be the same, especially since most people walk into a property for the first time and just want to see that an item exists and that it is somewhat clean and in workable condition...whether it has vinyl wrap doors or not is irrelevant for 95% of tenants.
Cheers
Glenn
$5 is a little more than I think it's worth, but for the sake of not feeling like you've given the tenant "something for nothing", and that increasing by $2 is just silly, then go for it!
And a rent raise of any size is far preferable to having the tenant contribute to the cost - I agree that could make things a nightmare, and I think it's ethically dubious.
And a rent raise of any size is far preferable to having the tenant contribute to the cost - I agree that could make things a nightmare, and I think it's ethically dubious.
I would suggest that you offer to put in the BIR but on the condition that the rent will increase by $xx.
The tenants in one of our IPs suggested new carpets in the bedrooms. They have painted internally, asked for permission but paid for the paint and did the painting - had they asked we would have been happy to pay for the paint.
The lease has just been renewed, and we gave them the option of paying an extra $10 over the increased rent for the new carpet. They chose to renew with the existing carpet. (The new carpet would have cost approx $750. With the increased rental and depreciation, we figure we would break even in 12 months.)
We are always happy to consider improvements as they increase the value of our properties and lead to increased rents. But we always seek tenant contribution in the form of increased rent.
The new carpet will be fitted when these tenants leave (and the additional rental added), as the existing carpet is very worn and well past its use-by date.
Marg
The tenants in one of our IPs suggested new carpets in the bedrooms. They have painted internally, asked for permission but paid for the paint and did the painting - had they asked we would have been happy to pay for the paint.
The lease has just been renewed, and we gave them the option of paying an extra $10 over the increased rent for the new carpet. They chose to renew with the existing carpet. (The new carpet would have cost approx $750. With the increased rental and depreciation, we figure we would break even in 12 months.)
We are always happy to consider improvements as they increase the value of our properties and lead to increased rents. But we always seek tenant contribution in the form of increased rent.
The new carpet will be fitted when these tenants leave (and the additional rental added), as the existing carpet is very worn and well past its use-by date.
Marg
Perhaps they just noticed after they moved in ? Also, insurance companies ask sometimes beofre granting contents insurance
You're assuming she has half the money to pay for the built-in. Good luck.
Put up the rent $10, and do the curtain rod; it's nothing and will make her feel good; hopefully she will pay the rent on time because you're a great Landlord.
It could set the pattern of a "high maintenance" tenant, but you can always say no to any requests.
How do you fail to notice something like the security of the property you propose to pay money to live in? It's more like she thought she'd get me to change it once she moved in - she had the PM wrapped around her finger, going over there back and forth, and telling me she is "nervy"... tough bickies! Not my bloody problem.
Insurance requires "reasonable" security. The property has reasonable security - deadbolts! I have *never* had an insurance company insist on any such thing for my contents insurance (and I've never had window locks, door bolts etc).
Caterpillar, I'm afraid that I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you on this one. Either you don't have a lot of contents, or perhaps you're one of the majority of Aussies who have their contents under-insured!
To insure your contents above a certain level, all major insurers certainly do demand window locks and door bolts on every exterior door/window, and sometimes even back-to-base security alarms. At the moment with my insurer, that level is around $95K - I know, because that's almost exactly what we estimated our contents at, and thankfully we're able to insure just below that level so that we don't have to fit all these impractical, unsightly, and expensive security measures to our home. We have 9 exterior-opening doors and 8 windows on ground level...
For a girl who loves her fresh air and likes to have everything thrown open, can you imagine what it would be like going out? You'd have to start locking 20 minutes before you go! 
Getting insurance has never been a problem for me in any of our PPORs and we don't have window locks. We are insured for well under $95K because where we used to have a house full of antiques, we have thinned down considerably, so I tend to pick a more realistic replacement insurance amount without scimping.
We have always had a back to base alarm and deadlocks, but I would not fiddle around with window locks, and it has never been an issue for us. It must depend on the amount insured I guess, as Tracey has said.
Our IPs all have deadlocks, and some security grills, but not window locks, and we have never had a problem there either (obviously we are not insuring contents).
We have always had a back to base alarm and deadlocks, but I would not fiddle around with window locks, and it has never been an issue for us. It must depend on the amount insured I guess, as Tracey has said.
Our IPs all have deadlocks, and some security grills, but not window locks, and we have never had a problem there either (obviously we are not insuring contents).
I'm with you Ozperp. I follow a similar philosphy and have been rewarded for it many times over. It may not be a "love fest" as one person put it, but that doesn't mena there can't be some "love" and mutual respect between landlord and tenant.
Just wanted to clarify about our insurance. I would hate anyone to think I am a tosser by saying we had a "house full of antiques". The problem with having antiques is that while they are not really worth a great deal, to insure them properly we are required to have a valuation. Valuations on antiques and jewellery are (generally) ridiculously much higher value than you could ever get when selling them.
Our antiques were only ever mid range and not high end items, but still the valuations made them seem like precious items needing care in a museum.
So after we added up our stupidly high valuations, we had to have a higher insurance amount than what all our contents would actually cost to replace, just to allow for the inflated valuations (really annoying).
We now have all modern furniture (sold the last antique last weekend) which doesn't have to be documented to insure and that is why we are able to insure for a "normal" amount.
I have never sold an antique for more than I paid, which makes the inflated valuations even more ridiculous.
Equally dubious (for me anyway) is having valuable art on the walls. A friend has some valuable art, but the insurance costs is too high for them to insure it, so it is not separately insured.
Insurance is a funny, funny thing.
Our antiques were only ever mid range and not high end items, but still the valuations made them seem like precious items needing care in a museum
.So after we added up our stupidly high valuations, we had to have a higher insurance amount than what all our contents would actually cost to replace, just to allow for the inflated valuations (really annoying).
We now have all modern furniture (sold the last antique last weekend) which doesn't have to be documented to insure and that is why we are able to insure for a "normal" amount.
I have never sold an antique for more than I paid, which makes the inflated valuations even more ridiculous.
Equally dubious (for me anyway) is having valuable art on the walls. A friend has some valuable art, but the insurance costs is too high for them to insure it, so it is not separately insured.
Insurance is a funny, funny thing.
