You are reading a single comment by @deleted and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
I would rent out as it is. I rented a shithole for a while, it was livable but couldn't have done it for longer than a couple of years. Cheap, lots of space, great location... We moved out and then two or three sets of lufuguss polo players moved in, it was London's premier Polo Palace for a while. Landlord was waiting for planning permission to come through, win win for everyone... Just advertise it here, it'll be gone in seconds!
Give your tenants a long lease, cheap rent, but some white paint and let them decorate the place themselves, you'll be laughing...
It'll buy you time to figure out what to do with it down the track...
deleted
My nan has moved into a home and won't be going back to her house again.
My parents are trying to work out what to do with her place - either the rental income or sale cost are needed for the care home.
The house definitely needs a lot of work - rewiring, old polystyrene tiles ripped out and new ceilings, new carpets, new kitchen at the very least.
The options would be:
A) Rent out as is
B) Refurbish and rent out
C) Sell as is
D) Refurbish and sell
Option A seems unlikely, B seems the most sensible. The place is in Chingford which is increasingly where Walthamstow price exiles are heading (but my parents aren't, so I will probably have to do a lot of the organisation).
If they decided to sell, I would rather buy a house that was a C than a D - but I know that discussion has been had in here before and that opinions are mixed, and I guess society at large would probably rather a neutrally-renovated house than a fixer-upper.
I don't really know what to advise them - I think B, unless there are strong opinions otherwise?