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.

What do you think about letting agent fees? MPs want to hear from you

Options
1235

Comments

  • Out,_Vile_Jelly
    Options
    Tom54* wrote: »
    . We cannot recall the last time a prospective tenant complained about our fees. .

    Well, what will complaining get them- fees waived? Or the offer to go and find somewhere else to live?
    Tom54* wrote: »

    We charge for renewal to reflect the administrative work involved (which is not simply printing out a document).

    Go on then, enlighten us as to the years of training and professional exams required to process an unecessary tenancy renewal.

    Tom54* wrote: »


    Tenants will no longer be clients of ours in any way.

    Tenants never have been clients; that's the point. They're paying for services that benefit the LL.
    They are an EYESORES!!!!
  • Tom54*
    Options
    You clearly have it in for letting agents. You may have had a bad experience and from what I hear from time to time, you're not alone. I appreciate that there are agents that overcharge and I acknowledge that there are some that do not provide a very good service (sometimes simultaneously..) That's an argument for regulating agents and maybe capping fees.


    I of course understand that ultimately the landlord is the client but we often find ourselves arguing the case for a tenant against a landlord who, possibly to a lack of legal knowledge, may in our view be acting unreasonably. Just in the last half an hour I have persuaded a landlord to lift charges that were to be made against the deposit of a recently vacated tenant. We handle all repair requests from tenants and try to get them all done even where the landlord is not necessarily obliged to carry them out. Recently we were reminding a landlord of a repairing responsibility he had despite the fact the tenant was in arrears.


    I suspect you may not want to hear any of this as it does not suit your agenda but these sorts of things are not uncommon and it is not fair to simply denigrate an entire industry on the basis of a few bad apples.
  • C_Mababejive
    C_Mababejive Posts: 11,654 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post Combo Breaker
    Options
    Letting agents are parasites in smart cars and need their fees severely controlled.
    Feudal Britain needs land reform. 70% of the land is "owned" by 1 % of the population and at least 50% is unregistered (inherited by landed gentry). Thats why your slave box costs so much..
  • Guest101
    Guest101 Posts: 15,764 Forumite
    Options
    Tom54* wrote: »
    You clearly have it in for letting agents. - No? I'm scrutinising your business model that's all. You may have had a bad experience and from what I hear from time to time, you're not alone. - nope, never. I'm very knowledgeable in the area. I appreciate that there are agents that overcharge and I acknowledge that there are some that do not provide a very good service (sometimes simultaneously..) That's an argument for regulating agents and maybe capping fees. - You haven't addressed any of the points raised.


    I of course understand that ultimately the landlord is the client - not ultimately. totally. The LL is your client and agency law requires you to look after their interests. but we often find ourselves arguing the case for a tenant against a landlord who, possibly to a lack of legal knowledge, may in our view be acting unreasonably. - that is unfortunately not your job and you are in breach of your duty. Unless ofcourse your arguing that he or she needs to comply with their obligations, in which case you aren't arguing for the tenant at all. Just in the last half an hour I have persuaded a landlord to lift charges that were to be made against the deposit of a recently vacated tenant. - The charges were either due or not. If they were not, then you were looking after your client by preventing them being taken to court. We handle all repair requests from tenants and try to get them all done even where the landlord is not necessarily obliged to carry them out. - in which case you may be in breach of your duty to your client. Recently we were reminding a landlord of a repairing responsibility he had despite the fact the tenant was in arrears. - So you were again protecting your client from costly legal action?


    I suspect you may not want to hear any of this - no I clarified the above quite nicely I think. as it does not suit your agenda but these sorts of things are not uncommon and it is not fair to simply denigrate an entire industry on the basis of a few bad apples.


    Can you perhaps elaborate on one point. What, outside of changing a date and reprinting, signing and posting a renewal, does the fee cover?
  • leslieknope
    Options
    Jeremy1960 wrote: »
    existing tenants will pay dearly for the folly of pandering to organisations such as shelter.
    You reap what you sow - BEWARE!

    shelter is a charity campaigning for the basic human right of everyone having safe accomodation. the fact you are so dismissive of A CHARITY makes me hope i never come across you. not even as a landlord or letting agent, just as a person. i hope you never find yourself so desperate in life as some of the people who are supported by shelter.
    CCCC #33: £42/£240
    DFW: £4355/£4405
  • System
    System Posts: 178,094 Community Admin
    Photogenic Name Dropper First Post
    Options
    For me, the key thing is that the current set-up prevents any kind of real competition. Tenants have no choice which agency they use (as they have to go where the properties are) but they have to pay the fees. There's no real incentive for landlords to choose a letting agent with lower fees, as they don't feel the impact of those fees. For a market to be fair and competitive, you have to have the person choosing the supplier also be the person paying for it.

    If fees were payable by landlords, then rent might go up. Fine. It's easier for tenants if those costs are spread over the course of a tenancy anyway. Besides, tenants pay those costs either way - this way, they can see exactly what they're going to be paying up front, and can compare properties on a like-for-like basis.

    But I suspect letting agents would also start lowering their fees, as it would become something that landlords consider when choosing an agent.
    gregsta1 wrote: »
    If agency fees are banned and agents then only work for the landlord (because right now we see ourselves as working for both tenants and landlords) then agents will have to refuse to answer a lot of these questions and explain that they no longer work for the tenants and that they should instead contact their local council or citizen's advice centre.

    And then the tenant will contact the landlord directly, who will call you to ask you why you're not doing the job he/she pays you for and talking to the tenant/managing the property. Alternatively, the tenant will contact the local council, CAB or Shelter, and will find out exactly what their rights and obligations are. They will then insist on their rights being granted - again, by contacting the landlord if you refuse to speak to them.

    Where on earth have letting agents got this idea from that they work for the tenant as well as the landlord? Everything that you do is for the benefit of the landlord, by virtue of the fact that if you didn't do it, they would have to!
    Tom54* wrote: »
    We process around 200 applications per year in our office. We cannot recall the last time a prospective tenant complained about our fees.

    I've rented several different properties in my life (and in London, where the fees are extortionate) and I've never complained about the fees. Why would I? I'm looking for somewhere decent to live that I can afford, and if properties are scarce then I'll pay up and take the hit, no matter how annoyed I am about it. That doesn't mean that there's not a problem, or that nothing needs to be done.
    Tom54* wrote: »
    We... do charge for renewal to reflect the administrative work involved (which is not simply printing out a document).

    What else is involved, please (other than changing the dates)?
  • Farkle
    Options
    When a prospective tenant has to be referenced then the reference agency requires a payment of between £25 and £50 (ex-VAT) per applicant. If the applicant fails the referencing procedure then why should the landlord have to pay?


    I agree some 'fees' are extortionate, and a landlord should pay for a tenancy agreement and inventory as it's in his own interests to do so.


    Unfortunately one months rent is just not adequate to cover dilapidations, and trying to pursue an ex-tenant for outstanding rent arrears, and damages is nigh impossible.


    All agents should be ARLA Members which would cut out lots of the inadequately trained agents I used to come across. I was very involved in the training of letting agents before retirement so can separate the wheat from the chaff. About 90% of agents are in need of regular training which unfortunately just doesn't happen.
  • Guest101
    Guest101 Posts: 15,764 Forumite
    Options
    Farkle wrote: »
    When a prospective tenant has to be referenced then the reference agency requires a payment of between £25 and £50 (ex-VAT) per applicant. If the applicant fails the referencing procedure then why should the landlord have to pay? - You can do a basic credit check for £4. Explain how one fails the referencing procedure?


    I agree some 'fees' are extortionate, and a landlord should pay for a tenancy agreement and inventory as it's in his own interests to do so. - indeed


    Unfortunately one months rent is just not adequate to cover dilapidations, and trying to pursue an ex-tenant for outstanding rent arrears, and damages is nigh impossible. - that why you get insurance?


    All agents should be ARLA Members which would cut out lots of the inadequately trained agents I used to come across. I was very involved in the training of letting agents before retirement so can separate the wheat from the chaff. About 90% of agents are in need of regular training which unfortunately just doesn't happen.
    About 90% of agents have zero training :)
  • Marvel1
    Marvel1 Posts: 7,172 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Post First Anniversary
    Options
    Tom54* wrote: »
    If I apply for a mortgage I undergo thorough checks to ensure that I will be able to meet the monthly payments. I pay the lender an application fee to cover the work involved.

    I didn't and not all charge.
  • Johnthecob
    Options
    Guest101 wrote: »
    Can you perhaps elaborate on one point. What, outside of changing a date and reprinting, signing and posting a renewal, does the fee cover?

    There must be lots of LAs viewing this thread, I'd like to see an answer to this Q.
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
  • 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173.1K Life & Family
  • 247.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards