Registered with
Sunday 23rd March 2014

Latest Comments

Total Number of Property118 Comments: 30


13:21 PM, 7th February 2020, About A year ago

R.I.P. David Knox - A.K.A. "Appalled Landlord"

I was so very sad to hear of David passing so suddenly. I will fondly remember working with him on the Property 118 tax planning software, which gave us both more grey hairs! David will be sadly missed by our landlord community for his hard work and support. I wish Ludmilla and all David's family and friends my most heartfelt condolences. Rest in peace, David, you were one of the best.... Read More


15:58 PM, 21st January 2020, About A year ago

Rent guarantor service - Should I proceed?

Hi Auntie P,

We have a relationship with a business that provides this service. It does not fall foul of the TFA 2019 it the tenant chooses to use them and the tenants still has a choice of satisfying your requirement for a Guarantor without paying for the service, i.e. by providing a family member to act as Guarantor.

Again, from page 24 of the guidance:

"Q. Can a tenant opt to pay for a third-party service?

A tenant can use the services of a third party if they choose to do so. For example, a tenant may use a reference checking company, a deposit replacement product or an inventory service. However, a tenant cannot be required to do so by a landlord or agent in connection with a tenancy.
You cannot require a tenant to meet any conditions that could only be met by paying a fee for a third-party service (e.g. requiring a professional clean at the end of the tenancy). However, you may ask a tenant or give them the option to do something as an alternative to complying with a different requirement which is permitted under the ban. For example, if the tenant is required to pay a default fee under a tenancy agreement to cover the reasonable costs of a replacement key, you could give them the option to replace the lost key at their own cost and time through a third-party. Alternatively, you may give a tenant the option of using a deposit replacement product instead of paying a tenancy deposit. Where possible, we encourage landlords and agents to be flexible."

In relation to your question regarding when the company Guarantor stops being liable, have you asked them? Generally they expect that an AST would need to be renewed in order to continue to provide the guarantee, but if the tenant refuses to renew their AST, then the company Guarantor may provide runoff cover until the tenant leaves, subject to an appropriate Notice being served on the tenant (i.e. S21), as this may be classed as a breach that their guarantee covers.

It's worth noting that our rent guarantee provider is happy with the company Guarantor, so if they're happy we can get complete cover against the risk of non-payment.

BTW, none of this is a substitute for appropriate tenant referencing, in fact the company Guarantor will probably insist that they are referenced to disclose any adverse credit history. They will almost certainly have a limit of how much adverse credit history the tenant can have and still qualify for the guarantee.

Remember, we all make mistakes in life, so not all tenants with a poor credit history must have a poor credit future. The company Guarantor will almost certainly help you to decide if they are a low or high credit risk, which is a part of the decision making process after all.... Read More


11:59 AM, 17th April 2018, About 3 years ago

Despicable vehemently anti-landlord Guardian article

Reply to the comment left by Mark Alexander at 17/04/2018 - 08:46
Hi Ros. How about making a complaint to the Independent Press Standards Organisation? Alex... Read More


16:42 PM, 31st January 2017, About 4 years ago

Summer Budget 2015 - Landlords Reactions

It's an interesting suggestion, which would certainly have the effect of raising revenue without the distorting and disproportionate effects of S24 on encumbered portfolio landlords. However, I don’t see that the Government would go for this.

Firstly, it would damage the bottom line of institutional investors and it’s obvious that they have a lot of influence over Government. What it would do, by choosing not to consider it, is expose the fact that Government does not want to damage the bottom line of institutional investors. Remember Gideon’s comments when a Ltd Co turnover tax was suggested.

Secondly, it would not meet the Government’s obvious aim to kill off small private landlords, by doing the exact thing of levelling the playing field. Again though, by choosing not to consider it, the Government would expose the fact that they want to kill us off to allow institutional investors to enter the market with an unfair advantage.... Read More


18:35 PM, 1st January 2017, About 5 years ago

Keeping the momentum going against Section 24

It allows for finance costs to be tax deductible when buying shares in a company that you have a 'relationship' with. These scenarios are akin to owning buy to let property, i.e. owning a reasonable share of the company (property), or working in the company (property).

You may be able to claim relief for interest paid or for alternative finance payments where the loan or alternative finance arrangement is used to:
•buy ordinary shares in, or lend money to, a close company in which you own more than 5% of the ordinary share capital on your own or with associates
•buy ordinary shares in, or lend money to, a close company in which you own any part of the share capital and work for the greater part of your time in the management and conduct of the company’s business, or that of an associated company
•acquire ordinary share capital in an employee controlled company if you are a full-time employee – we regard you as a full-time employee if you work for the greater part of your time as a director or employee of the company or of a subsidiary in which the company has an interest of 51% or more... Read More