Subletting my BTL to a company?

Subletting my BTL to a company?

Author
Discussion

soxboy

6,371 posts

221 months

Friday 1st March
quotequote all
LooneyTunes said:
DoubleSix said:
Lots or poor advice on here as usual.

OP, as you correctly identify, there are lots of advantages to corporate lets.

I rent apartments to a corporate for use by execs and gov officials.

It’s fantastic in nullifying all the risks of rent voids, section 22 nonsense and endless requirements for residential lets.
That is not quite the arrangement that the OP has been offered. I would gladly let to a proper corporate, with a proper agreement in place (containing appropriate terms).

The OP is right to be questioning the merits of the arrangement that has been proposed to them. I would not let to a random company who simply wants to sub-let to Joe Random.
Where has it been said by the OP that they are a random company and not a ‘proper corporate’?

LooneyTunes

6,953 posts

160 months

Friday 1st March
quotequote all
soxboy said:
LooneyTunes said:
DoubleSix said:
Lots or poor advice on here as usual.

OP, as you correctly identify, there are lots of advantages to corporate lets.

I rent apartments to a corporate for use by execs and gov officials.

It’s fantastic in nullifying all the risks of rent voids, section 22 nonsense and endless requirements for residential lets.
That is not quite the arrangement that the OP has been offered. I would gladly let to a proper corporate, with a proper agreement in place (containing appropriate terms).

The OP is right to be questioning the merits of the arrangement that has been proposed to them. I would not let to a random company who simply wants to sub-let to Joe Random.
Where has it been said by the OP that they are a random company and not a ‘proper corporate’?
The OP said that the intent was that it would be sublet.

Quite different to a corporate being on the hook for a property they use to house their own staff (an arrangement that I know several landlords work with where corporate accommodation is being provided for execs on secondment from overseas, relocating, etc).

I routinely get approaches from people wanting to "make my life easier" by renting our properties and then handling subletting/basic maintenance. Without exception they have all been absolute nobodies clearly wanting to sweat an asset owned by someone else. As others have said, an easy way into "property" without having to have (or put at risk) any capital.

Puzzles

1,925 posts

113 months

Friday 1st March
quotequote all
LooneyTunes said:
The OP said that the intent was that it would be sublet.

Quite different to a corporate being on the hook for a property they use to house their own staff (an arrangement that I know several landlords work with where corporate accommodation is being provided for execs on secondment from overseas, relocating, etc).

I routinely get approaches from people wanting to "make my life easier" by renting our properties and then handling subletting/basic maintenance. Without exception they have all been absolute nobodies clearly wanting to sweat an asset owned by someone else. As others have said, an easy way into "property" without having to have (or put at risk) any capital.
Yes, raining coloured envelopes.

Letting to a large, well capitalised business using the property for it's employees is very different.

FLGirl

Original Poster:

1,177 posts

193 months

Saturday 2nd March
quotequote all
LooneyTunes said:
soxboy said:
LooneyTunes said:
DoubleSix said:
Lots or poor advice on here as usual.

OP, as you correctly identify, there are lots of advantages to corporate lets.

I rent apartments to a corporate for use by execs and gov officials.

It’s fantastic in nullifying all the risks of rent voids, section 22 nonsense and endless requirements for residential lets.
That is not quite the arrangement that the OP has been offered. I would gladly let to a proper corporate, with a proper agreement in place (containing appropriate terms).

The OP is right to be questioning the merits of the arrangement that has been proposed to them. I would not let to a random company who simply wants to sub-let to Joe Random.
Where has it been said by the OP that they are a random company and not a ‘proper corporate’?
The OP said that the intent was that it would be sublet.

Quite different to a corporate being on the hook for a property they use to house their own staff (an arrangement that I know several landlords work with where corporate accommodation is being provided for execs on secondment from overseas, relocating, etc).

I routinely get approaches from people wanting to "make my life easier" by renting our properties and then handling subletting/basic maintenance. Without exception they have all been absolute nobodies clearly wanting to sweat an asset owned by someone else. As others have said, an easy way into "property" without having to have (or put at risk) any capital.
The kind of arrangement Double Six has is what would be ideal. It’s common I believe for companies to seek corporate lets for their staff, or agencies who work on behalf of many companies.

The ease of ending contracts vs eviction etc

Double Six - would it be ok to Pm you?

But yes, as many of you have said there are plenty of “property gurus” making lots of promises, so it would only work for me with an established business/agency.

My flat is already high spec and I’m in Brighton so I believe demand is here. I’m the freeholder so no lease issues but have heard what’s been mentioned re mortgage and insurance.

Plenty to think about and both options have their merits and pitfalls.

Thanks to all who have chimed in so far.

DoubleSix

11,743 posts

178 months

Saturday 2nd March
quotequote all
Sure, you can drop me a PM.

FLGirl

Original Poster:

1,177 posts

193 months

Saturday 2nd March
quotequote all
DoubleSix said:
Sure, you can drop me a PM.
thumbup

Thank you

UrbanAchiever

187 posts

138 months

Thursday 7th March
quotequote all
I work for a finance company, lending money to businesses.

We looked at lending to a business that does this.

They took on scores of properties from landlords in the expectation of sub letting them on a short term basis to professionals.

The risk was high. They had no idea if they'd fill the flats, but took on significant rental liabilities (effectively overheads).

I didn't like it at all and decided not to lend. 6 months later they went bust, no doubt owing the property owners rent.

In your shoes I'd be asking to see their year end accounts for the past few years, latest management accounts, how many properties they have on the books and their occupancy rates for all of them.

They are unlikely to want to provide this to you however. Without this, I'd walk away.

CaiosH

1,314 posts

228 months

Thursday 7th March
quotequote all
UrbanAchiever said:
I work for a finance company, lending money to businesses.

We looked at lending to a business that does this.

They took on scores of properties from landlords in the expectation of sub letting them on a short term basis to professionals.

The risk was high. They had no idea if they'd fill the flats, but took on significant rental liabilities (effectively overheads).

I didn't like it at all and decided not to lend. 6 months later they went bust, no doubt owing the property owners rent.

In your shoes I'd be asking to see their year end accounts for the past few years, latest management accounts, how many properties they have on the books and their occupancy rates for all of them.

They are unlikely to want to provide this to you however. Without this, I'd walk away.
Good call.


It's a terrible business model in my opinion. To me its a letting agent business, with a lot of additional liability.