Letting Agent gas & elec antics

G_M

This is an amazing thread on a whole load of levels!

The AST contract is between the Landlord and Tenant. The agent can certainly 'advise' the landlord, but only the landlord can decide what terms go in the contract.

The utilities contract is between the tenant and the utilities company. The landlord can advise the tenant, and has a right to know at the end of the contract who the supplyer is, but only the tenant can decide which utility company to use.

A landlord who does not understand her relationship with her agent is in serious need of self-education on her role, responsibilities, obligations etc.

An agent that attempts to insert a clause like this in their landlord's contract is seriously suspect. What else are they doing/not doing?

Hammyman

tbs624 wrote: »

So you don't think an LA should be able to bind you as LL, but you think it's okay to bind your T?
.

In my tenancy agreement, I have two clauses. First is not changing the supplier without my agreement. Second is no slot meters.

Both of these are being done for the benefit of my tenants. Why? Firstly, slot meters are the most expensive form of payment. Secondly, my gran was conned by doorstep energy salesmen to the point she could have changed suppliers several times in a year. Thankfully British Gas realised what was going on and put a halt to it - 3 notifications to change being sent to BG in week at one point!

Tiddlywinks

LooniesMum wrote: »

And I was careful choosing a letting agent - they're one of the big estate agents actually and this is the first thing in 7 years that I've not been comfortable with.

Is it R0mans by any chance?

A couple of years ago we rented through them and they sent the draft contract by email with no mention of utilities - then on the day of moving in they presented the contract with the new clause in it! A bit of a dirty trick really when you are minutes away from moving....... anyway, I signed it and then cancelled straight away with the utility company. Never had anyone come back to me about it but I was prepared to go down the unfair clause route (particularly when it had been changed without consultation so near to the signing). The landlord had not been consulted before the change either.

You pay them to work for you - they are preparing the contract on your behalf as it binds you and the tenant - just tell them to remove the clause.

Qualcuno

dizziblonde wrote: »

Oh god are they still trying to pull this crap?! They tried it with us forcing us to change to utility warehouse I think it was (we're the tenants), the second I challenged it and said, "errr no thanks, my husband gets a decent employee discount for the supplier we're with" they backed down. Turned out they'd set themselves up as a UW distributor or whatever it is and were trying to bully their tenants into them getting a nice extra wedge of cash.

Funnily the next time I had cause to speak to them I mentioned all of this - the whole scheme had been quietly dropped.

I'm a tenant who's been subject to Spark and they are much more persistent than this. It's taken 6 months and hours of phone calls to get them to agree that they wrongfully took over our supply. Finally got an erroneous transfer going through this month so that it'll be like we were with British Gas all along.

LA was Ludlow Thompson, can't believe how much hassle we have to go through just to earn them a bit of commission.

LooniesMum

Yes the contract is between me as LL and the occupier as tenant - but the document I'm referring to is the LA's terms and conditions, i.e. the contract between me and them, not me and the tenant.

The LA manages the property for me, that is to say they advertise for tenants, screen the tenants, collect the rent and do regular inspections, etc. I don't get one of these documents every time the tenant changes - they've sent it because they've changed their terms and conditions, or "updated" as they put it. They have highlighted the clause regarding Spark, so they're not really trying to hide it, I guess they're just hoping I won't give it much thought. But I just don't think it's for them to say who the supplier should be and I'm surprised that they've tried.

I have used a LA because that was the condition set by the mortgage provider when I asked for "permission" to rent what was my former home - their consent meant I didn't have to change my mortgage. I try hard to be a good and fair landlord - I don't complain when the place needs repainting every year, my DH fixes everything promptly, I liaise with the neighbours to make sure all is well, I've never withheld a deposit and I've never complained when a tenant left giving one month's notice, or sometimes none at all. Just because I'm a landlord that doesn't mean people should assume I don't have a clue what I'm doing or that I'm out to diddle the tenant!

tbs624

LooniesMum wrote: »

TBS624 - I was presuming the LA would get the tenant to sign the same T&Cs. It's not me that's trying to bind the tenant - it's the LA.

No I realise that - my post quoted skint student nurse's post to which I was specifically responding in post 8 My response to you, as the OP, was in post 6

LooniesMum

Thanks Tiddliwinks. No it's not Romans or Ludlow's, it's Reeds Rains

tbs624

Hammyman wrote: »

In my tenancy agreement, I have two clauses. First is not changing the supplier without my agreement. Second is no slot meters.

The T only needs to notify you of a change of suppliers rather than seek your agreement, although I agree with you that no meter change should take place without discussion with the property owner/LL

LooniesMum

tbs624 wrote: »

No I realise that - my post quoted skint student nurse's post to which I was specifically responding in post 8 My response to you, as the OP, was in post 6

Sorry! :embarasse

Brb

LooniesMum wrote: »

Just because I'm a landlord that doesn't mean people should assume I don't have a clue what I'm doing or that I'm out to diddle the tenant!

Apologies that my post offended. I did (wrongly) assume that given the LA was trying to specify which utility company to be used at the property that it was just an update from the clause that states that tenant cannot change utility suppliers (a clause that gets my goat). A vast amount of LAs are blissfully unaware that their ASTs are woefully out of date and borderline like asking your Mum for permission to have a sleepover LOL.

As a tenant sat there reading through an AST prior to taking possession of the property you generally don't feel able to negotiate terms and you definately don't feel the urge to point out that this clause x or y or z (or vast majority) is actually unenforceable and sometimes feel like pointing out that yes I am signing this document but I like your attempt at getting me to sign away my statutory rights. All this after you've mugged me for paying £200 for a credit check you know has only cost IRO £15 - £35.

Btw, I'd not be happy with yearly re-painting. Thats your profit margin getting eaten into. We all want you to make a profit