As one of many landlords who has made the decision to exit the rental market after 20+ years, I decided to invest €10K to bring a 13 year old property up to condition suitable for sale. The cost of this task was fairly significant after "good" long term tenants (family of 2+2, 5 years) vacated. I have a long standing relationship with the maintenance company I use to renovate and decorate and have a high degree of confidence that the costs charged were fair.
I have another property that is about to undergo a similar investment in order to make it more attractive for sale once those long term tenants vacate in the next 2 months. The quotes are of a similar ball-park to the €10K just spent.
These properties have always had money spent on them to keep them in good condition, so its not as if they have been left unloved for many years. What I have noticed is that the reasonable wear and tear aspect that is expected, has become far more severe in recent years. I have always tried to be careful to ensure responsible tenants were in situ, but upon reflection it would appear that in my own experience, the condition rental properties are being returned by tenants has declined in recent years. The standard 1-month deposit falls far short of what is required, perhaps 3 months deposit would be more in line with the costs being incurred by landlords at end of tenancy to bring the property back into original condition.
In effect, with due consideration for tax liabilities and other servicing costs, it would appear that the costs to bring a property back up to original condition completely negate a full 12 months of rental. I am not referring to horror stories, just regular longer-term tenancies that terminate normally.
I would be interested to hear of other landlord experiences of similar, as I don't really understand why there is not more demand for increased deposit amounts to help encourage improved tenant behavior.
Thanks
(Looking forward to soon being an ex-landlord).
I have another property that is about to undergo a similar investment in order to make it more attractive for sale once those long term tenants vacate in the next 2 months. The quotes are of a similar ball-park to the €10K just spent.
These properties have always had money spent on them to keep them in good condition, so its not as if they have been left unloved for many years. What I have noticed is that the reasonable wear and tear aspect that is expected, has become far more severe in recent years. I have always tried to be careful to ensure responsible tenants were in situ, but upon reflection it would appear that in my own experience, the condition rental properties are being returned by tenants has declined in recent years. The standard 1-month deposit falls far short of what is required, perhaps 3 months deposit would be more in line with the costs being incurred by landlords at end of tenancy to bring the property back into original condition.
In effect, with due consideration for tax liabilities and other servicing costs, it would appear that the costs to bring a property back up to original condition completely negate a full 12 months of rental. I am not referring to horror stories, just regular longer-term tenancies that terminate normally.
I would be interested to hear of other landlord experiences of similar, as I don't really understand why there is not more demand for increased deposit amounts to help encourage improved tenant behavior.
Thanks
(Looking forward to soon being an ex-landlord).