DAVID B
 |
Since the 1988 Acts there has been no legal difference between renting furnished or unfurnised. The tenant has the same rights in either. Both involve a two month notice of vacating from either side. Renting furnished entails ensuring all furniture is non combustible and that this is clearly marked on cusions etc. This often means only new furnishings can be used.
Properties of 2 or more bedrooms usually interest families with their own furniture and they will therefore decline a furnished property. Furniture is also a matter of taste and matching tastes is unlikely to happen.
Landlords need an inventory of all items at the property and this is enlarged tenfold with furnishings.
Message therefore is unfurnised unless it's a one person property. |
|
paobay
 |
It depends on what type rental property you are providing. If you have a beach house and only rents out by weeks. Or you are doing it as corporate housing, then you will need it furnish the basic - bed, nightstand, sofa, coffee table, fridge, a nice painting or two, but not too much accessories... and dishes.
If you are doing long term rental, then leave it unfurnished, because everyone would like to add in some of their style to make it feel like home. |
|
John D
|
If its a HMO it has to be furnished. If its a single family property better rented unfurnished.
If you rent it furnished, the items must meet health an safety regulations. Remember people would sue for the slightest things these days.
My advise as an estate agent is to rent it unfurnished. The difference in price is no more than £200 max in the £700 - £2000 PCM property range.
If the property is rented as furnished, you are required to ensure the items are continually replaced when damaged. The fridge or washing machine would break down and you would need to replace the items asap.
By law you are no longer allowed to hold the bond for an AST as such, claiming for intensional damages has to go through an arbitration process which you would not want to spend your time on.
You can download a free landlord information guide on our website www.avalonestates.co.uk |
|
tangoman1
 |
i think ,think unfurnished is better as any damage its you stuff |
|
Queen B
 |
legally there is nothing to debate. now, if you furnish it, are you willing to take a loss if the tenant destroys your property, or to make a claim against your insurance? i would lean towards unfurnished!!! |
|
just trying to make a difference
|
well furnished you could charge a little more, but you have to ensure that the items are in good working order and if anyone is injured through using them you may be liable for any personal injury claims they make.
as time goes on the items may become warn and you would need to replace at your own cost (you cannot charge a tenant for fair wear and tear!)
you need also to be prepared in case they are damaged or stolen when your tenant vacates - obviously you could keep any bond and try to claim the rest back through the courts but this could cost you more money than you get back!
plus there may be extra insurance implications on your part if you want the items insuring in case of fire, flood etc.
i think it would be easier all round to rent unfurnished, plus most people already have most of their own things. |
|
estielmo
|
Think "destroyed furniture." Think HUGE DEPOSIT to cover it. |
|
steve B
|
Unfurnished can be generally be easier.
If you are a landlord of a furnished building you need to be sure it all confirms to fire regs etc. |
|
;D
|
You really do not benefit from anything other than ruined furniture. The tenant gets free furniture. You don't have to move your furniture. Save yourself trouble of finding tenants because of a huge security deposit and go unfurnished. |
|
George H
|
Good finance question! I know of an organization that gives up to $1500 to people to help them with their rent or mortgage. It's available in most US cities, I highly suggest you check it out.
http://www.money-for-house-mortgage-rent.org
Best of Luck. |
|
shih tzu lady
 |
Purchasing the furniture costs a few bob and there isn't enough money in the difference between the two rental prices. Go with unfurnished if you can get a tenant. (Or part furnished, which is supplying curtains/blinds and floor coverings). |
|
xenon
|
If you let a property unfurnished, they might decide to stay for evermore, and there is no way you can get rid of them.
If the property is furnished, they usually sign a lease for 6 or 12 months, and then are obliged to leave if so requested. Usually a month's notice either way is required, after the lease is up.
This can be advantagous if you have good tenents who wish to stay on after the end of the agreement.
My advice is DON'T RENT, I have just had a bad experience, if you want more information email me.
LATER
Reading the other answers makes me think they are from USA, Our laws UK says squatters can stay in an unfurnished property. that is why developers pour concrete into toilets and handbasins to stop squatters. |
|
arsenalwegner
|
Supply the property well furnished and nice and homely,with vacuum cleaners and brushes and a lawnmower etc.It will encourage tennants to keep the place nice.I dont see legally it makes much difference whether it furnished or unfurnished. |
|
| |
|
Homepage 
Financial
Forum 
Renting & Real Estate 
No Spam
Adult 
Gambling
Unfinished
Deception
Plagiarism
Not English
