PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING

Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.

Letting Agent Check Out Inventory Fees

2

Comments

  • DoaM wrote: »
    I'll let others handle the specifics of the other questions you've asked, but I'll respond on this ...

    Neither you (landlord) or the letting agency are consumers - you don't have a business to consumer relationship - therefore consumer focused elements of the Consumer Rights Act will not apply. What matters is what the contract between you states.

    Hi DoaM,

    Interesting point, but it contradicts what I found on the gov.uk website.

    They've published a guide "Guidance for lettings professionals on consumer protection law"

    In article 4.1 it states

    As set out in chapter 3, we think that, in general, letting agents should treat their landlord clients as consumers except where it is clear that all those they are dealing with, are acting in the course of business


    Also, the high court defines the term "consumer" as a person who enters into a contract covered by the UTCCR and "is acting for purposes which are outside his trade, business or profession"

    As the income received from the property (we are accidental landlords) is outside of our trade, business or profession then we are consumers.

    Or is that wrong?
  • Miss_Samantha
    Miss_Samantha Posts: 1,197 Forumite
    edited 19 October 2016 at 7:43AM
    DoaM wrote: »
    Neither you (landlord) or the letting agency are consumers - you don't have a business to consumer relationship - therefore consumer focused elements of the Consumer Rights Act will not apply. What matters is what the contract between you states.
    As set out in chapter 3, we think that, in general, letting agents should treat their landlord clients as consumers except where it is clear that all those they are dealing with, are acting in the course of business

    I think that neither is correct.

    IMHO, a priori a landlord is not a consumer but an 'accidental landlord' may still be considered a consumer.
    Also, the high court defines the term "consumer" as a person who enters into a contract covered by the UTCCR and "is acting for purposes which are outside his trade, business or profession"

    Apart perhaps an accidental landlord, landlords run a business.
  • Hi Miss Samantha

    Appreciate your candour.

    As we've rented out our property as we are abroad we most assuredly accidental landlords and not professional ones and should, therefore, fall into the category of a consumer.

    However, I'm interested to hear on what basis you believe the excerpt
    As set out in chapter 3, we think that, in general, letting agents should treat their landlord clients as consumers except where it is clear that all those they are dealing with, are acting in the course of business

    is incorrect as this was lifted this directly from the 'Guidance for lettings professionals on consumer protection law' published by the Competition & Markets Authority available on the gov.uk website
  • Guest101
    Guest101 Posts: 15,764 Forumite
    tadgh_99 wrote: »
    Hi Miss Samantha

    Appreciate your candour.

    As we've rented out our property as we are abroad we most assuredly accidental landlords and not professional ones and should, therefore, fall into the category of a consumer.

    However, I'm interested to hear on what basis you believe the excerpt


    is incorrect as this was lifted this directly from the 'Guidance for lettings professionals on consumer protection law' published by the Competition & Markets Authority available on the gov.uk website



    Typically commercial agreements fall outside consumer regulations. Both parties are expected to have a reasonable level of knowledge and where appropriate, to seek legal advice.


    Although it's a rare occurrence, I'm inclined to agree with Miss S that LLs fall outside the scope of consumer regulations.


    Also - no such thing as accidental landlord - you didn't accidentally call the letting agent, accidentally sign the contract, accidentally get tenants and accidentally accept rent.


    HOWEVER letting agents are supposed to act in the best interests of the principal (you) and as such should not deliberately put you in a position which leads to you losing out.
  • Guest101 wrote: »
    Also - no such thing as accidental landlord - you didn't accidentally call the letting agent, accidentally sign the contract, accidentally get tenants and accidentally accept rent.

    That's quite a goading comment but sorry, I completely disagree with you.

    Example, a property is purchased with the intent of being lived in by the owners, but then being forced to rent it out as they are relocated due to their job, temporarily. Alternatively, a property with tenants in situ is is inherited from the passing of a relative.

    In both these cases, the landlord had no intention of being a landlord, but had to take on that role. Our situation forced us to become landlords.

    Perhaps you'd prefer the term unintentional landlords. Call them what you will, these types of landlords do exist

    Thanks for the feedback anyway
  • Guest101
    Guest101 Posts: 15,764 Forumite
    tadgh_99 wrote: »
    That's quite a goading comment but sorry, I completely disagree with you. - it's not meant to be goading, it's meant to point out that you didn't accidentally become a landlord.

    Example, a property is purchased with the intent of being lived in by the owners, but then being forced to rent it out as they are relocated due to their job, temporarily. - So? The property can be left empty or sold. Alternatively, a property with tenants in situ is is inherited from the passing of a relative. - possible, but the estate could evict them prior to this.

    In both these cases, the landlord had no intention of being a landlord, but had - chose* to take on that role. Our situation forced us to become landlords. - no it didn't. You chose to do this as it suited you.

    Perhaps you'd prefer the term unintentional landlords. Call them what you will, these types of landlords do exist

    Thanks for the feedback anyway


    You chose to go into business, and your business is providing a home for someone else.


    I'm not having a go, I'm saying that being a LL has a lot of responsibilities and it's poor form to say it was all an accident.
  • I agree with you. Being a landlord has a lot of responsibilities. Responsibilities that we have lived up to. The whole topic of this post is how to can deal with the Letting Agent that hasn't lived up to their responsibilities.

    I didn't say we became landlords accidentally, we became an accidental landlords

    The term "Accidental Landlord", whether it be residential or commercial, is a recognised term in the property market (a quick google search will demonstrate this). There are approximately 360,000 accidental landlords in the UK (according to the NLA). Your comment that it's poor form to say it was all an accident doesn't really have any foundation and it is completely acceptable form to call it accidental.

    And as for your suggestions to leave the house vacant or away or sell it while we are temporarily away are beyond comprehension.

    But thanks for posting your opinion anyway.
  • To all those that offered useful advice, thank you.

    I have now found the answer. For those of you that are interested, even though the agreement is covered under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, it comes down to the AST. As the landlord we can instruct the agency not to carry out the inventory.as long as the tenants agree (in fact we can make any change as long as it is not deemed illegal and the tenants agree). The are bound to act on our behalf and must carry out the instruction.

    Thanks everyone.
  • Guest101
    Guest101 Posts: 15,764 Forumite
    tadgh_99 wrote: »
    To all those that offered useful advice, thank you.

    I have now found the answer. For those of you that are interested, even though the agreement is covered under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, it comes down to the AST. As the landlord we can instruct the agency not to carry out the inventory.as long as the tenants agree (in fact we can make any change as long as it is not deemed illegal and the tenants agree). The are bound to act on our behalf and must carry out the instruction.

    Thanks everyone.



    Yes and that is down to agency law, not the AST :)
  • Guest101
    Guest101 Posts: 15,764 Forumite
    tadgh_99 wrote: »
    I agree with you. Being a landlord has a lot of responsibilities. Responsibilities that we have lived up to. The whole topic of this post is how to can deal with the Letting Agent that hasn't lived up to their responsibilities. - That's fine. I didn't say you were a bad landlord. You sound perfectly reasonable.

    I didn't say we became landlords accidentally, we became an accidental landlords - I don't see the difference?

    The term "Accidental Landlord", whether it be residential or commercial, is a recognised term in the property market (a quick google search will demonstrate this). - Just because something is widely recognised, doesn't mean it should be accepted. There are approximately 360,000 accidental landlords in the UK (according to the NLA). - Indeed, and I disagree with all of them using that term. Your comment that it's poor form to say it was all an accident doesn't really have any foundation and it is completely acceptable form to call it accidental. - An accident implies that there is no fault on the LL. So: "Sorry I didn't protect your deposit, i'm an accidental landlord, golly gosh how slly of me". It also suggests that there is a lack of professionalism in the service the LL provides (or intends to provide).

    And as for your suggestions to leave the house vacant or away or sell it while we are temporarily away are beyond comprehension. - Why is that?

    But thanks for posting your opinion anyway.



    Why not leave it empty?


    You see that would be the default option, you bought a house to live in and needed to leave. It is now empty.


    You then choose to rent it out.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173K Life & Family
  • 247.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards