46 – Holiday Homes Make Poor Investments

We spent last weekend five hours South of Perth in Albany, WA. With the kids in tow, we rented a cutesy old cottage for they duration so they’d have their own rooms and space to run around.

Being away in this context soon got me thinking about the many reasons why we veered away from holiday homes/apartments as an investment. With family frequently visiting from intrastate and overseas, a property that could be rented out is when not in use was hugely appealing to us at first glance but many reasons led us to reconsider.

When we first started looking seriously at property investment, one of my first thoughts was to purchase a holiday apartment. I figured something with a few bedrooms in nearby Scarborough might not cost too much and “Scarbs” is an increasingly vibrant area in Perth. It’s also a good spot for visiting tourists with its expansive beaches and nearby amenities. I’ll note this was before I came to prefer land (i.e. a house on a block of land) over apartments and decided to invest for long-term growth rather than cash flow—in short, don’t buy an apartment because the land content ratio is too low…). In general, you’ll likely pay a premium to buy in a holiday location—which may not relate to long-term capital growth. In other words, are you better off buying into a highly-priced holiday location or doing your research to buy into a cheaper suburb that’s likely to grow faster and produce a better return on investment in the long run?

We also had to ask ourselves whether we buy something local for the sake of the visiting relies or choose something further afield in a more interesting (to us) location—either out of town or in another state. If we wanted to make use of the property ourselves, would a “holiday at home” (er, a property in Perth, where we live) be all that desirable?

Regardless of location, the ability to produce an income will always be at the mercy of the local short-term rental market and tourism conditions. Although I’m no expert in this area, I’ll hazard a guess that sites like Air BnB are eating into the traditional short stay markets.

With a normal rental, you have the surety (in a way) of a guaranteed weekly rent for the term of the lease. With a holiday home, you might have a higher nightly rate but the uncertainty of whether the property will be full one night and vacant the next—which, on average, may or may not equate to the same income as a regular rental. Averages are useful but may hide seasonal ups and downs and corresponding cash flow troughs throughout the financial year.

Unlike a typical suburban house rental where we’re renting a property to a tenant as a place to live, as their home, with a holiday home we’re dealing with a different set of variables. How closely are holiday makers vetted? How do we insure the property? Will neighbours object to the comings and goings of visitors at unusual hours? What happens if China crashes and the Chinese tourists suddenly dry up? We had a global recession not all that long ago; are the Yanks still flying in to little old Perth at the same rate they were before the dot com and housing market crashes?

At the very least, you’ll need to estimate vacancy, affix a nightly rental price tag that fits the market and attracts the right kind of holiday makers or travellers, and then consider marketing costs (for your online listing, membership with the local tourism body or visitor centre, etc) and cleaning costs. Of course the property will also need to be furnished with not only furniture and appliances but linens, cookware, books/DVDs, artwork, etc. Other running costs will include electricity, water, gardening, and possibly cable and internet, as well as the usual rates and insurances.

Don’t forget, if you want to use the property yourself, the ATO will require you to exclude the period when the property was not available for rent as a percentage of any deductions you might want to claim (i.e. negative gearing). On the upside, you may be able to claim a higher rate of depreciation (4% p.a. over 25 years instead of 2.5% p.a. over 40 years).

If you want to use the property yourself during peak periods, then you’ll likely have to forego any income the property would otherwise generate during that time.

The property we rented in Albany, although lovely in an historic kind of way and very practical for our young family, has zero appeal to me from a practical and maintenance standpoint. Although the main house felt sturdy and sound, the back extension (these places always have a back extension, right?!?) had a definite lilt to it despite being the newer construction.

Then my wife plugged in the kettle for her morning tea but it wouldn’t switch on because she’d unwittingly tripped the circuit. Of course we just thought the kettle was a dud—until it came time for a shower and we had no hot water from the instant gas system with its electric ignition. It took a very upset wife and a call to the neighbouring manager, at 8:30am on a Sunday morning, to sort that one out.

We’ve been living in a relatively new house in Perth for going on a decade now and although it’s been a pretty easy run there are always things to deal with—we’ve already had to replace the hot water tank, for example. I cannot begin to imagine the countless number of ongoing issues to be found with an older house. On the one hand, it’s established and “bedded in” but how soon until the roof needs replacing or the foundation restumping? Insects and damp or mould may be problematic in older houses and the electrics may be shady.

Although I’d love to have a nearby holiday home for the relatives or a beach shack down south that we can use periodically, as an investment we’ll be sticking with suburban houses for now and fork out for a week or two in that holiday rental when we want to get away.

I suppose a disclaimer is also worth posting: I'm just a guy, I'm not an accountant, lawyer, solicitor, tax agent, mortgage broker, banker, financial adviser, insurance agent, land developer, builder, government agent, or anything else so I disclaim your application of anything I write here is to be applied at your own risk. What I write may be incorrect and you are best to seek your own professional advice (tax, legal, financial, and otherwise) before entering into contracts or spending your money. Your situation is unique to you and what I write here reflects my experience only. This content is not professional advice and is not tailored to your situation. I’m not selling anything and I do not receive any form of commission or incentive payments for any companies or individuals I endorse. I'm learning too and expect to make many, many mistakes along the way.

Enjoy,

Michael

38 - Surprise! Unexpected Changes

I find the vast majority of mainstream real estate reporting in the media is either all or nothing: the market is going gangbusters or it’s the next worst thing since the Great Depression and all hope is lost (I’ve given up paying any attention to the news…). There’s no middle ground. Similarly, the property spruikers only share the positives and conveniently overlook the details when they do cite a one-off example of something gone wrong.

Although many of the posts on this blog have been relatively upbeat—in line with our experience to date, I strongly believe in reality, facts, and the accurate, fair reporting of our experience. On that note, today’s post is a recounting of what is likely to be the largest single “upset” (not to dramatize) so far along our property investing journey.

Earlier this month we had three tenants in the Brisbane property and over six months remaining of a 12-month lease; then, suddenly, we had one tenant plus an “unknown” (or rather, the girlfriend of the remaining original tenant) and a pet request for a middle-aged, large-breed dog. On Friday morning last week, a water leak in the metre box was also reported.

How quickly things change from a seemingly stable position to near chaos. Fortunately, the exemplary property management team at West Property is handling all of this for us but I won’t deny I’ve found it remarkable that tenants can simply walk away from a contractual agreement they’re legally obliged to uphold. If nothing else, this doesn’t make for a good lease reference for them and they may end up have to cover re-letting fees for us.

I’m not sure why two of the three roommates have left but I believe they were together as a couple and I assume they either now aren’t or have decided they needed more privacy. I suspected there may be some instability when we took on the trio (we very much expected to end up with a family—mum, dad, two kids, and a dog) but they were the first application after a few weeks of home opens and they were happy to pay the advertised weekly rent. I thought one of them might leave eventually but wasn’t expecting any changes in the first year. In my mind, you sign a lease for twelve months, go to the hassle of moving, and then you stay put for a few years—call me simple and old fashioned.

We were notified by the property manager the pair have now moved out and requested to be removed from the lease. We had the option of saying no to this request and they would be obliged to continue paying their share of the rent—regardless of whether they’re actually living there. Practically, that option may be difficult to enforce.

In their place, the girlfriend of the remaining tenant had moved in, I’m told, but she had neither applied nor was she approved by us to live at the property. The wording in the lease document is quite specific to this point and clearly notes no one else can live in the house without prior agreement by the landlord.

If this new couple are keen to stay on, can afford the rent, and seem to be acceptable, then we’re all for that. Ideally that means no break in rental income. Plus there’s less wear and tear on the house for them to move out and be replaced with new tenants. But who is this mystery woman? Does she have an income? Does she have any prior rental referrals (or a criminal history)? Does she smoke? If she’s not paying her way, can her partner afford the full rent on his income after paying only a third of the rent to date?

Technically, there are more questions to be answered if the girlfriend checks out. Do we amend the lease to include her or have the tenants sign a new, 12-month lease? Do we increase the rent now as part of the new lease or after six months via some kind of special conditions clause (which may be tricky to do in Queensland—I’m not sure)? If the couple opt for a 50/50 split, the original tenant will need to increase his bond contribution from 1/3rd to 50%—or 100% if he’s covering the lot.

The worst-case scenarios I can imagine are having the remaining tenant vacate (for whatever reason), leaving us with an empty house to re-let and the resulting loss of income, or—if he stays—having a gap in the rent payments from the departing couple while all of this is sorted out. If all else fails, we are still covered by the Open Corp rental guarantee but that does mean having to accept any tenants they pre-screen and put forward to us (which could be good or not so good). Without checking the finer points of our insurance policy, we may also be covered for loss of rent if the rental guarantee were not in place.

Here’s another good fact sheet if you’re interested: http://tenantsqld.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/You-Want-to-Leave-Nov-09-SD_NEW.pdf

On the dog front, I simply wasn’t mentally prepared to deal with this request so early into the original lease and the property manager has recommended we say no for now (which was a relief). Before today’s revelation, we had considered allowing the pet if the (original) tenants were willing to sign a new 12-month lease effective immediately—using this request as a trigger event to keep the tenants on for a longer period. That’s less of an issue now.

We also hadn’t yet decided whether there would have been a corresponding rent increase; we can’t increase the rent mid-lease in Queensland so even a token increase would likely be the way to go to a) ensure we achieve an increase within the 12-month period, b) condition the tenant that the rent will always increase at renewal time, and c) cover any issues related to the dog (i.e. damage) as we can’t charge a pet bond in Queensland.

Meanwhile, the water leak is still being investigated by the water company. At least it’s outside and I’m told it’s likely on the water company’s side or will otherwise fall to the builder to rectify.

A few weeks on, and after consulting with Open Corp and receiving a tenancy application from the girlfriend, we offered the couple a six-month lease to see how it works out. We also increased the rent by $5/week. The lease was accepted and signed and we shouldn’t have missed any rental payments (the outgoing tenants would have been required to continue paying their share of the original lease until it was terminated). It will be interesting to see if the relationship lasts and what bearing a breakup has on the remaining tenant’s affordability; it’s easy to say a married couple with kids would have been a more stable tenant option but who knows—with the frequency of divorce I’m not convinced marriage equates to tenant longevity.

I suppose a disclaimer is also worth posting: I'm just a guy, I'm not an accountant, lawyer, solicitor, tax agent, mortgage broker, banker, financial adviser, insurance agent, land developer, builder, government agent, or anything else so I disclaim your application of anything I write here is to be applied at your own risk. What I write may be incorrect and you are best to seek your own professional advice (tax, legal, financial, and otherwise) before entering into contracts or spending your money. Your situation is unique to you and what I write here reflects my experience only. This content is not professional advice and is not tailored to your situation. I'm learning too and expect to make many, many mistakes along the way.

Enjoy,

Michael