Dog in rented flat - admin charges. Help!

Milliewilly

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

£117!!!???

For the work experience girl to cross out the word "not"????

Try hiring a Barrister for an hour and that will seem like small change.

It is not as simple as crossing out the word 'not' by the office monkey (and even if it was they can charge what they like, its the tenant causing the
change).

There will be the amendment to the contract, someone to check it , someone to post it in duplicate to the Tenant and Landlord , then to return a copy and the Managing agent to check and file it etc.

Looking at Romans website they appear very professional and open till 9pm weekdays and all day Saturday and Sunday someone is going to have to pay for all that. Fancy websites and offices in Berkshire / Surrey etc don't come cheap.

Wee_Willy_Harris

Milliewilly wrote: »

Try hiring a Barrister for an hour and that will seem like small change.

It is not as simple as crossing out the word 'not' by the office monkey (and even if it was they can charge what they like, its the tenant causing the
change).

There will be the amendment to the contract, someone to check it , someone to post it in duplicate to the Tenant and Landlord , then to return a copy and the Managing agent to check and file it etc.

Looking at Romans website they appear very professional and open till 9pm weekdays and all day Saturday and Sunday someone is going to have to pay for all that. Fancy websites and offices in Berkshire / Surrey etc don't come cheap.

A barrister????

Have some sense.

Either they simply scrub out the word "not" in the clause about keeping dogs, or insert the phrase "without the landlord permission". Why on earth would a bloody barrister need to be employed to perform a function the work experience girl could do with one arm behind her back??

Mouseman

I think the barrister was introduced simply to show that a person's time can be worth a LOT of money. £117 isn't that much compared to a lot of legal workers.

Personally I'd be doing my best to not pay anyone £117 but I'd have probably asked the landlord direct, enclosing the relevant form/contract for them to sign. LA can then sing for their money, as they didn't have to do anything.

£117 isn't that much when some LAs charge at least that much for the initial contract and referencing. Often a whole lot more. It's still 117 quid though for asking permission. I'm not convinced anything needs to be rewritten. There's no administration in asking the landlord "Can they have a dog? Yes, well that's fine then." They could just pop a quick note to that effect in the tenant's file - if they want to charge £117 for THAT, I'd tell them to whistle dixie!

Milliewilly

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

A barrister????

Have some sense.

Either they simply scrub out the word "not" in the clause about keeping dogs, or insert the phrase "without the landlord permission". Why on earth would a bloody barrister need to be employed to perform a function the work experience girl could do with one arm behind her back??

My Barrister charged me £500 an hour. There's some context for you.

I never for one moment intimated a Barrister was needed to amend a contract for a Dog.

Wee_Willy_Harris

Milliewilly wrote: »

My Barrister charged me £500 an hour. There's some context for you.

I never for one moment intimated a Barrister was needed to amend a contract for a Dog.

Then why are you banging on about a barrister?

Milliewilly

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

Then why are you banging on about a barrister?

I'm not.

I used it once as an example of hourly rates - Mouseman seemed to understand it ok, you didn't so I had to explain.....

Wee_Willy_Harris

Milliewilly wrote: »

I'm not.

I used it once as an example of hourly rates - Mouseman seemed to understand it ok, you didn't so I had to explain.....

Well, I still don't understand the point. Unless you're trying to frighten the OP into thinking that this rediculous £117 charge is for the complex legal work which isn't required. The LA gets paid a fee to manage the tenancy. A minor change to one small part of the TA is just part and parcel of tenancy management. Most TA state that redecoration is not allowed. Are you suggesting that THIS should attract a £117 fee as well. It's border-line extortion!

Milliewilly

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

Well, I still don't understand the point. Unless you're trying to frighten the OP into thinking that this rediculous £117 charge is for the complex legal work which isn't required. The LA gets paid a fee to manage the tenancy. A minor change to one small part of the TA is just part and parcel of tenancy management. Most TA state that redecoration is not allowed. Are you suggesting that THIS should attract a £117 fee as well. It's border-line extortion!

Complex legal work would obviously cost more than £117 as I have eluded to but I won't mention the 'B' word so as not to 'Bang on'. I am not trying to frighten the OP that is a rIdiculous suggestion.

What's the hourly rate to have your car serviced? Do you think that goes straight in the mechanics pocket?

What about if you had an operation privately - straight into the Consultant's pocket? No, there are overheads with any business and they aren't a charity.

The fee may be high (I personally don't think it is) but it's the Tenant incurring the cost through their own actions. Judging by the 'Puppy thread' they are lucky a Dog is allowed at all, as I said earlier, it's a small price to pay in the scheme of 16 years or so of Dog ownership, its vaccinations will cost more than £100 to start with.

If the tenant decides to change the terms of their agreement for whatever reason the Managing Agent is perfectly at liberty to charge an admin fee. Whether that's £1, £10, £1000 or a bag of magic beans. If the tenant doesn't like it then find another property (that will take a Dog).

If I wanted a Dog and was then allowed to keep one in a property where it previously wasn't allowed and I knew that when I took on the property I wouldn't complain about the charge.

Wee_Willy_Harris

The comparisons with car servicing and dog vaccinations is irrelevent. As is the content of the puppy thread. We are talking about a £117 fee for a simple bit of admin. The tenant is hardly "changing the terms of their agreement", as you so dramatically put it. They are simply asking for the LLs permission to keep a dog. As other posters have already stated, there isn't really any need to alter the existing tenancy agreement.

Notlob

Milliewilly wrote: »

Looking at Romans website they appear very professional and open till 9pm weekdays and all day Saturday and Sunday someone is going to have to pay for all that. Fancy websites and offices in Berkshire / Surrey etc don't come cheap.

Do you work for Romans?