Landord - Agency fight, Tenant in the middle *UPDATED*

CHR15

*** UPDATED - for those already familiar, please go to reply #13 ***

Hi,
Posting on behalf of a neighbour of mine.

She (neighbour) is renting a house through an agency (£500 per Month).

The landlord is a nice old chap, entirely friendly and has always dealt with issue promptly.

The landlord popped round to say he hasn't been paid by the Agency for the last 3 Months so he is £1,500 out of pocket (ish).
The Landlord has told her to stop the Standing Order to the Agency and start paying him directly.

I have looked through the Tenancy agreement, the contract is with the Agency not the Landlord.
I also have an issue with the deposit, it is not held by TDS, the agreement says it is held either by the Landlord or the Agency (I can see where this will end up!!)

I asked her to speak to the agency before cancelling anything, which she has done. The Agency claim they only missed one payment which has now been resolved.

Where now??

I have asked her to inform the landlord what the Agency have said, and tonight we will put it in writing, sent recorded to the Agency (copied to Landlord) so there is a trail.

I feel my neighbour is dragged into someone elses argument, the fight is between the Agency and the Landlord, and until the Landlord formally closes the contract, I think her credit could be affected if she breaches the payments.

Any suggestions??

princeofpounds

I have looked through the Tenancy agreement, the contract is with the Agency not the Landlord.

Firstly, even if the agents sign the contract, the contract is with the Landlord. Under normal practice tenants NEVER have a contract with the agency, always the LL. Look carefully at the front of the tenancy agreement - what does it say?

I also have an issue with the deposit, it is not held by TDS, the agreement says it is held either by the Landlord or the Agency (I can see where this will end up!!)

It will always be the landlord's responsibility to return the deposit, no matter what the agent has done or where it is stored. Assuming the regulations apply in this case (and they probably do), then it is worth asking the landlord to protect the deposit. Your friend may wish to wait until the agency issue is settled, but she doesn't have to.

Finally, she should ask the landlord to confirm his instructions for payment in writing (and it might be worth checking the land registry to ensure he is owner of the property, which will only cost a couple of quid). Then she should pay as directed.

princeofpounds

I feel my neighbour is dragged into someone elses argument, the fight is between the Agency and the Landlord, and until the Landlord formally closes the contract, I think her credit could be affected if she breaches the payments.

The fight IS between A and LL.

If she misses payments her credit will not be affected. What will eventually happen is that the LL would take her to court and the court will make the order to pay him. If she pays promptly there will be no credit issue and it will probably be sorted well before it gets to that stage.

She can also phone Shelter for free advice that isn't from some bloke on a forum! (though us blokes on forums can be knowledgeable at times!)

CHR15

Blokes - Knowledgeable!!! Don't let a woman hear you say that!!

Okay, makes sense.

I haven't got the agreement to hand but I was less than impressed when I saw it. Not on headed paper, nor even page numbered.

I say not headed, no better headed than the Agency name and address typed up in bold font using MS Word at the top centre.

I will get the request from the Landlord in writing and speak to him about the deposit.

Thanks

adg1

CHR15 wrote: »

I have looked through the Tenancy agreement, the contract is with the Agency not the Landlord.

The contract is with the Landlord for the property, not the Agent. Unless the agent is the owner of the property.

CHR15 wrote: »

I also have an issue with the deposit, it is not held by TDS, the agreement says it is held either by the Landlord or the Agency.

Whether the deposit is held by the LL or the agent doesn't matter. It needs to be registered with one of the three deposit protection services. If the landlord holds it I believe they have to be registered as a LL with one of the three schemes to be allowed to register it and hence comply with the laws. As most LLs aren't registered, most agents hold the deposit in a stakeholder account (separate from the business account and unaffected if the agent collapses). Contact each one and enquire about the deposit to find if it is registered.

CHR15 wrote: »

The Agency claim they only missed one payment which has now been resolved.

This dispute is between the LL and the agent. Make sure your neighbour keeps a receipt for each payment or gets a payment schedule from her bank to show she has been paying the rent.

CHR15 wrote: »

I feel my neighbour is dragged into someone elses argument, the fight is between the Agency and the Landlord, and until the Landlord formally closes the contract, I think her credit could be affected if she breaches the payments.

She has been dragged in. As long as she keeps paying rent then there is no issue on her part. If the landlord wants her to pay rent direct to him then, as long as the agency is aware and happy, then there will be no issue.

She needs to get the LL to talk to the agent, not herself, and fight it out. She should simply carry on as though nothing has happened. As long as she's been paying rent on time in full there is no breach of tenancy conditions or issues on her part.

moromir

CHR15 wrote: »

Hi,
I also have an issue with the deposit, it is not held by TDS, the agreement says it is held either by the Landlord or the Agency (I can see where this will end up!!)

Provided you intend TDS to mean The Dispute Service and their Tenancy Deposit Scheme, the TDS doesn't hold the deposit, the Landlord or the Agent holds it, it is just necessary for them to register the deposit with the scheme. (Note some other schemes do require the Landlord to send them the deposit to hold so you need to check EXACTLY what scheme it has been registered with).

CHR15 wrote: »

I haven't got the agreement to hand but I was less than impressed when I saw it. Not on headed paper, nor even page numbered.

I say not headed, no better headed than the Agency name and address typed up in bold font using MS Word at the top centre.

Tenancy Agreements are not normally printed on the company's headed paper as far as I know/ am aware and would say that this is not an issue.

For example mine is printed on fancy heavy paper with Assured Shorthold Tenancy printed at the top, the only reference to the agency is that it is given as a c/o address on the front page for the Landlord.

However do check that the Agreement somewhere gives a UK address on which the tenant can serve notice, this is essential.

There is no need for the pages to be numbered provided the agreement clearly states clause numbers/letters for each clause, this provides less margin for error than a page number ever could!

CHR15

Thanks guys. I will look further at the agreement this evening.

Regarding the deposit, the agreement makes no mention of any scheme (I didn't realise there were three). It simply says held by either the LL or Agency, which I found unsettling. It gives potential for each to point the finger at the other come the fateful day of refund.

I looked at the TDS Website which stated that for any deposit to be included within the scheme, a certificate and reference number would be issued (with an example) and this certificate MUST be issued for it to be valid. She holds no such confirmation.

Thanks for the detailed replies.

BitterAndTwisted

There might be potential for each party to point fingers at each other but this will not affect your friend. Your friend can still check with all three tenancy deposit schemes to discover whether her deposit is lodged with them. I believe that all she needs is the full postal address of the property concerned. It doesn't really matter whether the agents have lodged the deposit or not: the final responsibility for returning the deposit is with the landlord upon whose behalf the agents were or are acting.

If the landlord is a decent sort he should be informed of this and that there are also harsh penalties imposed for not ensuring the deposit is lodged with one of the schemes and that this became compulsory in 2007.

It's an unfortunate fact of life that an awful lot of letting agents are ignorant of many of the laws relating to the rental of properties but that's a headache for the landlord to deal with.

Should you friend have any other questions she should come here or have you return for more information

Fire_Fox

CHR15 wrote: »

Thanks guys. I will look further at the agreement this evening.

Regarding the deposit, the agreement makes no mention of any scheme (I didn't realise there were three). It simply says held by either the LL or Agency, which I found unsettling. It gives potential for each to point the finger at the other come the fateful day of refund.

I looked at the TDS Website which stated that for any deposit to be included within the scheme, a certificate and reference number would be issued (with an example) and this certificate MUST be issued for it to be valid. She holds no such confirmation.

Thanks for the detailed replies.

As others have explained the contract is with the landlord, the agency are just that - an agent of the landlord. Similarly the landlord is responsible for returning the deposit safely at the end of the tenancy. The best thing to sdo is ask the landlord to put into writing that he wishes the rent to be paid into a different account than originally agreed by his representative. Formal communication should always be in writing so there is a paper trail in the event of a dispute.

madeupname1

adg1 wrote: »

She has been dragged in. As long as she keeps paying rent then there is no issue on her part. If the landlord wants her to pay rent direct to him then, as long as the agency is aware and happy, then there will be no issue.

... She should simply carry on as though nothing has happened. As long as she's been paying rent on time in full there is no breach of tenancy conditions or issues on her part.

I don't agree with this at all.

The Agent is the Landlord's agent. If the Landlord advises the tenant that the agent is no longer authorised to act on behalf of the landlord, the tenant should not continue to pay the agent because at that point the agent is no longer authorised to receive these funds on the landlord's behalf. If she continues to pay the agent in these circumstances, the landlord will be entitled to pursue the tenant for any money she has paid to the agent after he told her to stop.

There may be a question as to whether or not the landlord is entitled to terminate his contract with the agent. However, in the event he is not, the agent will need to pursue the landlord in respect of that. The agent would not be entitled to pursue the tenant as the agent and tenant have no contractual relationship. Therefore, the tenant is safest paying accordingly to the landlords directions.

Jowo_2

The best way I've heard this described is that an agent is a transparent window from the landlord through to the tenant. There is a direct legal relationship between landlord and tenant despite the agent who is a mere intermediary.

My understanding is that there is a contract between Landlord and Letting Agent giving the LA permission to sign docs on the landlord's behalf and therefore any dealings between LA and Tenant is really between landlord and tenant.

In short, contract between LL and LA and contract between LL and tenant. There is no direct legal relationship between LA and tenant.

The tenant should pay the landlord directly if requested - that's who they've signed the contract with even if they are represented by an agent.