Rent in advance demand question?

G_M

martin1981 wrote: »

Hi there,
I'm currently dealing with the agent, so the demand for the "arrears" is coming from them. In theory I'm only meant to deal with the landlord after speaking to the agent (rather than contact him directly), but I next time I speak to him I will make him aware of the other problems.

I will see how the agent reacts when I make them aware that I believe the demand is not right, and take it from there.

" only meant to deal with the landlord after speaking to the agent "

Says who? He's your landlord. His name is on the contract. It's his name/address you write to with official letters. It's his investment you are living in.

Follow cluttons advice re the rent statement but when you get it, if you're not happy with it, forward it/show it to the LL and let him know how you feel.

princeofpounds

Your liability for rent is determined by the contract you signed. You have written a lot of information but not explicitly provided the clauses so it's difficult to give a precise answer, but I suggest the posters above are on the right track and a rent statement is a great place to start.

If the LL is trying to keep large, permanent-on-a-rolling basis amounts of advance rent that is treated under law as a deposit and has to be protected. The LA might be getting the LL into trouble if they persist in this course of action.

The LA can do nothing without the LL's consent (including evict), so why don't you speak to the LL and ask what he is expecting?

clutton_2

"" advance rent that is treated under law as a deposit and has to be protected.""

i cannot agree with this... rent is NOT returnable - so is not a deposit and so does not have to be protected

G_M

clutton wrote: »

"" advance rent that is treated under law as a deposit and has to be protected.""

i cannot agree with this... rent is NOT returnable - so is not a deposit and so does not have to be protected

Hmmm. But it IS returnable if the tenancy were to legally end during the period for which rent had already been paid. Debatable and probobly not relevant here. Just an interesting thought.

princeofpounds

Clutton, you are right, but my thoughts would be that the tenancy would get itself into that exact situation when it went periodic, as the tenant's notice would be shorter than the amount of advance rent paid. I suppose it doesn't have to be periodic, and it's something of a diversion from the immediate question, but I still think the LA is managing this poorly for the landlord.

martin1981

Thanks for the replies, I don't really understand the issues relating to advanced rent being treated as a deposit, although my deposit is separate (about 1.5 months rent) so not sure if this would affect me anyway.

I'm at the stage now where I've sent them a brief request for the statement of the rent account, in the format Clutton suggested. So I will report back to say what it says as soon as I hear from them. Thanks again!

martin1981

Hi there,
Just to let you know I've received the statement of the rent account, hopefully this will make things clearer. I can't really post the file exactly as it is (because it has all my details on it etc.), but it's pretty clear, and I'll describe exactly what it says. Sorry if it's a bit fiddly or long winded, just trying to get all the details down here...

In the statement, on the left there are columns for the date, the reference number of the landlord and the tenant (me), the transaction reference, and the description. Then on the right are the all important numbers, presented in 4 columns "Debit (Demanded)", "Credit (Received)", "Remaining" and "Balance".

They show very clearly that back in July that the deposit (around £2000, or 1.5 months rent) was demanded and paid. It also shows rent paid for the first month (21/07/2010 - 20/08/2010), and then rent paid for the following 5 months (21/08/2010 - 20/01/2010). After each payment it shows they were paid on time (on the same date as demanded), and the "Balance" column returns to 0. The amount paid is obviously for the period up until the end of the first 6 months of the tenancy, because in the "Description" column it says "Rent due for period 21/07/2010 - 20/08/2010" and "Rent due for period 21/08/2010 - 20/01/2011". I would've thought this quite clearly indicates I've paid and should be covered up until the next rent payment due on or before 21/01/2011, i.e. after the first 6 months has elapsed? This is what I originally expected, and from what others have said on here (and other people I've spoken to) it seems to be the normal scenario.

However, below the payments just mentioned they've also listed the two rent payments due in November and December as being demanded and not paid, so the balance has increased to show 2 months rent due. It shows that payments of the monthly rent are due on 21/11/2010 (the "late" one which they called me about last week) and 21/12/2010. For these periods respectively it shows "Rent due for period 21/11/2010 - 20/12/2010" and "Rent due for period 21/12/2010 - 20/01/2011". I don't think this makes sense, because both these periods clearly overlap with the period already mentioned above which runs until 20/01/2011, which shows as having been paid?? It seems the statement shows a demand for the same period, twice!

Yes it does say in the contract that I should be making a payment on 21/11/2010. However as mentioned before, the same clause which mentions this payment will be due also states that the payments should continue monthly until the end of the tenancy, so implies that I would be paying for 14 months instead of 12 during the 12 month tenancy period!

Please let me know if I'm right, but as I understand it I really don't think they can demand the payments 2 months early? Given the badly worded clause in the contract, taken along with the fact it was not explained to me at any point that I would be paying 2 months in advance, plus the statement I've just received showing a demand for rent for a period which is clearly showing as already paid for!! At this point my inclination is to send them a brief (and polite) email to explain this to them, and that I think they've just made a mistake given what the paperwork indicates? Is this the right thing to do? Any advice appreciated, thanks.

sonastin

If you were paying two months in advance, the payment just demanded would be for the period 21/1/11 to 20/2/11 and the payment due in December would be for the period 21/2/11 to 20/3/11.

Without the exact wording of the contract, we can't tell a) if you are supposed to be paying 2 months in advance and b) if those clauses are enforcable as part of the tenancy. Regardless of that, one way or another your rent statement is wrong. They can't require the period 21/11/10 to 20/1/11 to be paid for twice. I suggest you point this out to them and copy it to the landlord. If he is as reasonable as you say he might just sort this out for you.

BitterAndTwisted

Yes, write (and keep a copy) and point out that you believe that they have made a mistake. It defies logic to prepare a statement showing two monthly rental-periods demanded twice. A normal person would have expected the person printing this load of old tripe to have glanced at it and noticed the error before sending it to you.

When writing to the agent I would cc the landlord on the document and send them a copy of both your letter and their "rent statement" in the post as well. I think it would be good for the LL to know how fundamental an error this is and they should be concerned at the agent's inefficiency.

G_M

Sort this out with your landlord. You say he is reasonable. It's his money. It's his responsibility. The agents are clearly hopeless. He'll probobly be annoyed they are so hopeless but pleased to have it brought to his attention.