12:07 PM, 28th April 2014, About 8 years ago 23
I wonder whether anyone can help me on this please?
I recently bought 2 houses both of which were in run down old fashioned condition as follows:
Property 1 had been owned by 2 elderly brothers. Overall dirty, old fashioned decor. Filthy ‘doggy smelling’ carpets. Dated kitchen and bathroom and in my opinion would not have rented out to anyone without a revamp which I have done and now looks great – cost around the £5000 mark.
Property 2 had been rented out for the last 25 years with little done to it in that time beyond decorating. Decor fine (if you like artex!?). Old fashioned kitchen and bathroom and archaic gas fires x2 one of which had a back boiler for hot water and central heating.
Here I replaced one gas fire with a good looking modern electric fire and the other was removed and a new gas combi boiler installed along with modernisation of heating system with system flush, Magnaclean, trvs in each room etc etc. Plus updated fuse box and electrics (not full rewire). Old lino replaced with ceramic floor tiles. Modern kitchen units and bathroom suite installed in place of the old ones.
My question is this:
My accountant told me that because the revamps were done before any tenants moved in, the outlays are capital costs and not allowable costs against income, but I would argue that without the refurbishments first the properties would not have been in a rentable condition – all outlay went on bringing the properties up to modern standards, like for like and nothing put in that wasn’t there before, ie no extensions, loft conversions or anything like that.
I’m sure that this has been encountered by lots of landlords before and I would be grateful if someone could help please?
Please Log-In OR Become a member to reply to comments or subscribe to new comment notifications.