Estate Agent Renewal after 9 years

clutton_2

""Both tenants have not agreed to stay but apparently this is more for the introduction."

can you explain ?

600600

Apparently the renewal fee is for the introduction of the tenant and the fact that they are still in the property means that I have to pay the renewal fee.

There is a renewal slip that is sent to the tenants only one tenant has signed this not both.

clutton_2

i think you should take all the paperwork you can find to citizens advice bureau and get their help = without a copy of the agrement you had with the agent it is well nigh impossible for anyone here to offer you proper advice

600600

Received a letter from the estate agent. Enclosed a copy of an agreement dated and signed in 2000 stating:
[URL="file:///C:%5CUsers%5COshin%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_colorschememapping.xml"] ' I have understood and fully agree to all relevant pages of your terms and conditions and I instruct X estate agent to act on my behalf for the purpose of letting my property. I understand payment becomes due should X estate agent be instrumental in introducing a tenant who consequently takes occupation of the property.'

Would this apply for renewals? Is so would I still need to see that the tenants have agreed to stay through them?[/URL]

clutton_2

i think you would need to read the full contract carefully - as only you can see if it does include renewals. HOWEVER - i would call their bluff and say that ""even tho a contract was signed, no work was done afterwards, and I consider the fee to be utterly inappropriate, and I will not be paying the fee in light of the Foxtons case. Should you wish to argue your case before a judge I will be pleased to see you in court."

Just because you signed something does not necesssarily make it lawful. £400 for doing sweet fanny adams would almost certainly be deemed by a judge as an Unfair Clause and he would throw it out.

DVardysShadow

600600 wrote: »

Received a letter from the estate agent. Enclosed a copy of an agreement dated and signed in 2000 stating:
[URL="file:///C:%5CUsers%5COshin%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_colorschememapping.xml"] ' I have understood and fully agree to all relevant pages of your terms and conditions and I instruct X estate agent to act on my behalf for the purpose of letting my property. I understand payment becomes due should X estate agent be instrumental in introducing a tenant who consequently takes occupation of the property.'

Would this apply for renewals? Is so would I still need to see that the tenants have agreed to stay through them?[/URL]

Why are you linking to something which is on a C: drive somewhere? presumably yours?

GDB2222

Whilst the Foxtons case would over-ride any contract (or rather the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations would), that case wasn't about whether renewal commissions were unfair per se. It was about the Foxtons contract wording. I think you need to read the case or ask in a legal-orientated newsgroup for advice.

Here is a linky to the latest case although there were several prequels: http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2009/1681.html&query=foxtons&method=boolean

harib0uk

I've had a quick scan read through and I'm wondering who collects the rent money as there is no mention of that..(from my quick scan)

If it's the agent that collects the money and then pays it on then they are within their right to collect a fee, 7% sounds about right for that (I'm sure that's what I pay for my agent to collect the money).

600600

Sorry I copied and pasted from a word doc.


The agents do not collect the rent or have even not contacted the tenants in the last year.

GDB2222

From the judgment - you really ought to read it:

" I should first make clear what I am not deciding, and what I am not asked to decide. I am not asked to decide, and do not decide, that renewal commissions (in the sense used in these proceedings) are always unfair. I make that clear because some of the evidence and submissions of the OFT come close to asserting a case that they are always unfair, and some of the correspondence seemed to be based on such a proposition, though Mr Nicholas Green QC, for the OFT, eventually made it clear that that was not his case. Mr Michael Kent QC, for Foxtons, opened his submissions by saying that I would eventually have to, and should, rule on renewal commission generally, but he moved away from that. I shall not decide whether or not renewal commission is always unfair to consumer landlords. "

There is actually nothing in the judgment to say that renewal commissions are unfair, merely that Foxtons buried the details in tiny print in their contract and that the entirety of their blurb was misleading, which made the Foxtons renewal commission unfair. You can't take that as any indication to support your case.

In fact, what you should do is ask the agent for a copy of the terms and conditions they used in 2000, then send all the paperwork to the OFT for a ruling whether it offends the UCCT regs. If they support you, then the lady can get all the renewal back that she has paid in the last 6 years. OTOH they may support the agent. You are asking for trouble if you simply ignore the bill.