New research by the United Kingdom’s National Landlords Association (NLA) shows that a large minority of landlords did not buy their first rental property with the intention of letting it out.
Wednesday, November 8th 2006, 10:45AM
by The Landlord
While 56.6% of them did buy their first rental property specifically for that purpose, a surprisingly large 42.6% came into the residential letting market almost by chance.
For 21.3% of those surveyed, their first residential letting was a property that they already owned but decided to let out rather than sell.
Some 9.1% of respondents inherited their first rental property and decided to let it out rather than sell. A further 9.4% gave a variety of reasons as to how they almost ‘stumbled’ into being a landlord, including:
· A property bought for themselves but with part of it let to tenants; · A property originally bought for themselves, but they changed their mind and chose to let it out; · A property inherited with sitting tenants; · Inheritance of a property investment company; · Letting a home above commercial premises or a shop.
David Salusbury, chairman of the NLA, comments: “Our research shows that for a significant minority of people who let out properties, they didn’t set out to be landlords. In my experience, they often don’t see themselves as landlords. Perhaps they own a property that they like and then go to live or work abroad, or perhaps they have got married or moved in with their partner. They may decide to keep their home as an investment and let it out – ‘the path of lease resistance’, one might say”.
“But even if they have just one rental property, they must remember that in the eyes of the law they are subject to the same laws and regulations as the portfolio landlord who may own fifty or a hundred properties.”
