I have a mundane question here. I have a property that has a solid wood swing set in the backyard. It is getting old now and the current residents don't want to use it. So I am determining what to do. I thought when I first started renting out this house that this would be a nice add-on for a family with young children and families are often the ones to rent this property. However, after the current residents said they didn't think it was safe and didn't want it I started wondering if I was creating an unnecessary liability for myself, i.e. I provided a swing set that a resident or one of their friends got hurt on because it was old and something broke.
So my question is should I replace it as a nice bonus to families with children or totally remove it because it is a liability I should try and eliminate?
this may depend on how sue happy your state is, but up here I would never even consider leaving it. you could consider calling your insurance and ask them how they feel about a playground set provided by you, but imagine the liability if a neighborhood kid falls off it and gets hurt? I would take it down.
I second that. I, too, would take it down. The fact that its condition is worsening makes the decision even easier.
Thank you for your comments. That is the direction I was leaning as well.
@Michael Tempel No real upside, a lot of downside. Remove gets my vote too
Wrong Michael Temple :-). I often have my name spelled Temple even by close friend and business partners (Tempel....el throws everyone off). Michael Temple, we should connect simply for having the same last name...maybe we are related:-).
Pro tip: When tagging someone that's already posted in the thread, you can type @? . It will bring up the list of people who have posted in the current thread. Then you're sure you get the right person. :-)
Create Lasting Wealth Through Real Estate
Join the millions of people achieving financial freedom through the power of real estate investing