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.Estate Agency Breach of Contract
chockyice
Posts: 2 Newbie
Hi,
I am a landlord and lease my property through an estate agency. I pay the agency full maintenance cover so they are supposed to look after everything for me, which costs me £90 per month. However, the service they provide me is very poor as they never call me back when looking into something for me, this has happened numerous times before, which i have complained about. Also, they took money out of the rent i receive for work which they did not do and im still waiting for them to confirm they did the work. Finally, they are supposed to do routine checks on the property every 3 months but in the 2 years they have been looking after the property they have only done 2 checks which has been confirmed by the tenants.
Where do i stand legally? Can i cancel the contract i have with them and claim the money back they have been charging me due to breach of contract? Please help.
Many thanks,
I am a landlord and lease my property through an estate agency. I pay the agency full maintenance cover so they are supposed to look after everything for me, which costs me £90 per month. However, the service they provide me is very poor as they never call me back when looking into something for me, this has happened numerous times before, which i have complained about. Also, they took money out of the rent i receive for work which they did not do and im still waiting for them to confirm they did the work. Finally, they are supposed to do routine checks on the property every 3 months but in the 2 years they have been looking after the property they have only done 2 checks which has been confirmed by the tenants.
Where do i stand legally? Can i cancel the contract i have with them and claim the money back they have been charging me due to breach of contract? Please help.
Many thanks,
0
Comments
-
Hi,
I am a landlord and lease my property through an estate agency. I pay the agency full maintenance cover so they are supposed to look after everything for me, which costs me £90 per month. However, the service they provide me is very poor as they never call me back when looking into something for me, this has happened numerous times before, which i have complained about. - What does your contract say about this specific aspect? Does it say for example, we will notify the LL with-in 12 hours of any progress? Also, they took money out of the rent i receive for work which they did not do and im still waiting for them to confirm they did the work. - Why don't you ask your tenant? Finally, they are supposed to do routine checks on the property every 3 months but in the 2 years they have been looking after the property they have only done 2 checks which has been confirmed by the tenants. - So?
Where do i stand legally? - So far there is not enough there to unwind the contract Can i cancel the contract i have with them - I don't know, I cant read the T&Cs from here and claim the money back they have been charging me due to breach of contract? - no. Please help.
Many thanks,
Breach of contract in the UK works on loss.
So where is your loss?
You MAY have a claim on works which they've charged for but not carried out, but equally you may not. It depends on the nature of that issue.
Certainly you have yet to suffer any loss as a result of not inspecting.
And Certainly it is unclear whether regular contact is a clause in your agreement.0 -
Why don't you ask your tenant? - I have and they said that nobody has been out to check the gas for the past 6 months - which is what the agency are charging me for.
So? - I pay for a service they are not carrying out. The contract states that the property will be inspected every 3 months but so far its once every 12 months.0 -
Why don't you ask your tenant? - I have and they said that nobody has been out to check the gas for the past 6 months - which is what the agency are charging me for. - So you don't have a valid GSC? Better get one sorted asap.
So? - I pay for a service they are not carrying out. The contract states that the property will be inspected every 3 months but so far its once every 12 months.
And where is your loss? What amount do you claim?0 -
Loss is a simplistic way of looking at it. Remedy is to also put the losing party in the same position as if the breach had not occurred, which would be a proportion of the £90 a month. If you are paying £1080 a year and parts of the promised service is not being delivered, 25% would equate to £270 a year. You'd have to work out and justify what percentage of the fee is money for nothing.0
-
Loss is a simplistic way of looking at it. Remedy is to also put the losing party in the same position as if the breach had not occurred, which would be a proportion of the £90 a month. If you are paying £1080 a year and parts of the promised service is not being delivered, 25% would equate to £270 a year. You'd have to work out and justify what percentage of the fee is money for nothing.
The inspections would not make up 25% of the service, not in a million years.
Remedy - the OP is in the same position had the breach not occurred....0 -
Breach of contract in the UK works on loss.
..
Certainly you have yet to suffer any loss as a result of not inspecting.
Surely you should be able to claim for goods/services not provided.
By your logic, if you paid for a rollercoaster ride and they felt like not opening it that day, you have no financial loss so no claim. If you paid for a toy and they refused to hand it over, you have no financial loss so no claim.0 -
Surely you should be able to claim for goods/services not provided. - You mean the inspection or the GSC? The Inspection, you would need to prove that as a result of this you had suffered a detriment (commonly a financial loss). So they fail to do inspection, the house actually has mould in it and you have to pay to have it remedied. You could then claim that cost (or likely a percentage of it). The GSC you would pay for one and claim that amount back. (if you were fined by HSE, you could also claim that back)
By your logic, if you paid for a rollercoaster ride and they felt like not opening it that day, you have no financial loss so no claim. - well you would have the cost of the ticket to claim back? BUT typically you pay to access the whole theme park, not the single ride. So you would need to show that, in your example, you left straight away making no use of any other services. If you paid for a toy and they refused to hand it over, you have no financial loss so no claim.
Of course you have a financial loss, because those are goods. The cost of the toy.
Deminis non curat lex. The courts do not bother themselves with trivial matters - a technical breach of the contract with no loss is not enough to void a contract and recover fees.0 -
Of course you have a financial loss, because those are goods. The cost of the toy.
Deminis non curat lex. The courts do not bother themselves with trivial matters - a technical breach of the contract with no loss is not enough to void a contract and recover fees.
I’m not talking about whether the contract should be voided, I mean is there a claim for breach of (part of) the contract.
You’re now suggesting two reasons
1. The inspections are a trivial / small part of the contract. Okay, so the percentage of the contract up for debate. Simplify by considering a contract for just inspections in return for a fee (however small).
2. Failure to perform the inspections has no financial loss. If the loss from the ride is the cost of the ticket, then the loss from the inspections is the amount paid for the inspections part of the contract.
0 -
I’m not talking about whether the contract should be voided, I mean is there a claim for breach of (part of) the contract.
You’re now suggesting two reasons
1. The inspections are a trivial / small part of the contract. - Yes indeed. Okay, so the percentage of the contract up for debate. Simplify by considering a contract for just inspections in return for a fee (however small). - possibly. The problem is that the agent quotes a management fee for the whole package. They could in theory be dealing with calls everyday, repairs every week, or whatever. But they wont charge extra for that. They quote based upon an average. A quote for just inspections may not be a fair analysis of how the fees break down.
2. Failure to perform the inspections has no financial loss. If the loss from the ride is the cost of the ticket, then the loss from the inspections is the amount paid for the inspections part of the contract. - Each case is judged on it's own merits, so read what I said again. If you bought a ticket to the theme park, went solely to that ride, saw it was closed and left immediately, and you could convince a judge that was the only reason to go, you may have a claim.
I disagree it's a loss. They have breached the contract, but it's not a core term. The core term is to manage the tenancy in exchange for a % of the rent.
Now that said, obviously on some level they aren't doing that and it would be worth exploring ending the contract, but I don't know what the termination clauses are.
But I doubt that it would be possible to sufficiently distinguish the inspection part from the overall fee.0 -
I disagree it's a loss. They have breached the contract, but it's not a core term. The core term is to manage the tenancy in exchange for a % of the rent.
Now that said, obviously on some level they aren't doing that and it would be worth exploring ending the contract, but I don't know what the termination clauses are.
But I doubt that it would be possible to sufficiently distinguish the inspection part from the overall fee.
Not sure why you brought losses or voiding of contracts into this, doesn't seem at all relevant. I would have thought given your wealth of legal expertise that you could see the OP is making a claim for specific performance, one I think they are perfectly entitled to make.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.6K Spending & Discounts
- 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 607.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards