Letting agent refusing recurring tennancy

As has been suggested you should ignore the agents and contact the LL directly. Agents will always be keen to push you into signing a new contract as they can charge you and probably the LL as well.

Have you got contact information for the LL? If so write a letter or ask to meet them to discuss options that suit you and the LL (not the agents).

Edit: beaten to it by deannatrois

stothy862 wrote: »

Thanks for everyone's help, after following the advice the letting agent came back and said that they would ask the landlord, no gaurentees as he may want fixed term (we offered a long term contract but they refused?!) but it would still cost us as we signed a document at the start of the tenancy that said this apparently. I may just take this as I've had enough of dealing with these crooks but I was wondering if anyone knew if was even legal to charge for a renewal fee on a statutory shorthold tenancy?

It's legal to charge anything, but whether they can actually make you pay it is another matter. You are not in fact renewing the contract, so a renewal charge shouldn't apply. There may be something in your contract about a fee specific to this situaiton so have a look at your original contract, but I would say they're just trying it on.

Are you able to contact the landlord directly? I wouldn't necessarily trust the agent, whose incentives are to have you sign a new AST or get someone new who will. Is the agent going to ask the landlord what s/he wants, or sell him/her on insisting on an AST? Will the agent try to paint you as problematic and suggest an S21 so that they can get a new tenant (and new fees)? My point is that the periodic tenancy is less secure, so it's in your best interest to know what your landlord's plans are.

Marktheshark wrote: »

Your contract is not only with the landlord if there is an agent involved who charges you money.
It is a Tri party contract, you have equal bargaining power and you can sack the agent in the arrangement.

No, the agent is working on behalf of the landlord, the tenant cannot sack the agent. Although as mentioned they are free to contact the landlord directly, who may or may not decide to end their relationship with the agent.

This does sound odd from a fee point of view as the landlord is the client of the agent rather than the tenant so the agent would be supplying a service to the landlord by offering a renewal so not sure why they are billing tenant rather than landlord. I can see that an agent can charge a tenant for referencing and credit checking at the start of a tenancy but a renewal would not involve any further checks on a tenant already living there.