Is it cheaper to rent a furnished flat in London or an unfurnished one?

2 Comments

1. MadMan says:

   May 31, 2010 at 3:07 am

   LOL! It is ALWAYS cheaper to rent an unfurnished flat. If it is furnished, you have to have the furniture. If the landlord will rent it to you without the furniture, which is possible but not likely, they may or may not charge you for removing the furniture.
2. La Comtesse De Whippet says:

   June 2, 2010 at 11:02 pm

   Sometimes there’s virtually no difference and it depends on the standard of the furnishings provided. If a landlord has been out to Ikea and bought very basic things at minimal cost, the rent difference between a place furnished this way and an empty place will be marginal if anything. Usually, a well-furnished apartment is more expensive – however, you do save yourselves the cost of buying your own furnishings and if you don’t have a lot of money available to furnish a home entirely yourself, renting furnished can work out ‘cheaper’ in that sense.

   In some cases, especially with management companies or landlords who own multiple properties, you’ll have the option of renting a place furnished (everything included), partially furnished (the landlord will provide some items) or unfurnished, with no added charges for the choice you make. However, most landlords letting furnished property will say you need to keep it as is, they won’t have the storage to remove things. You can of course pay to store items yourself, as long as you replace everything back the way it was at the end of the tenancy.