2nd ADVICE NEEDED URGENTLY- Renting issue

ashleypride

propertypooch wrote: »

Can anyone voice their opinion on whether it seems fair?

No not fair. They have spent money on a advert and now they have a tenant (same one but hey), they haven't lost anything.

If however, they want to charge you for the admin fees for a new contract then it could be argued that was fair.

But I don't really understand, you said you were on a rolling contract. Did you send them a letter to terminate the contract or not?

Procrastinator333

ashleypride wrote: »

If however, they want to charge you for the admin fees for a new contract then that is perhaps fairer.

How is that fair when there is no need to sign a new contract?

Jenniefour

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

Couldn't disagree more!

They are trying to scam her in to paying fees to sign up to another tenancy. Why feel any guilt over this?! Do you tip a waiter if he is rude and spills food over you? No.

You are also confusing the LA with the LL. Just because you are going to annoy the LA by not signing a new agreement and not paying this stupid fee doesn't mean the LL will care less. If the tenant is paying rent on time and looking after the place the LL will not care one jot about the LA.

If you need the security of a 6 month contract, or 12 month contract, then sign the contract first and then tell them no on the advertising costs. I just wouldn't bother though, what LL throws out a decent tenant? Only one who wants the place back to live in or sell, and if they want that they wouldn't be asking you to sign a new contract anyway.

I'm fine with having a different view on this. Not sure whether the waiter pouring soup over you is an accurate analogy - the OP had clearly come to some arrangement, offered by the LL/EA over date of vacating when it was believed that the property purchase was going ahead, and said she thought it was considerate. And whilst I would agree that some LL's/EA's are scammers plenty are not.

ashleypride

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

How is that fair when there is no need to sign a new contract?

If they need to sign a new contract, then it could be argued it is fair. If they don't then obviously it's not. I'm really not clear from the OP what the situation is.

TBH I hated renting through EAs and never found any of their charges 'fair'.

Procrastinator333

Jenniefour wrote: »

I'm fine with having a different view on this. Not sure whether the waiter pouring soup over you is an accurate analogy - the OP had clearly come to some arrangement, offered by the LL/EA over date of vacating when it was believed that the property purchase was going ahead, and said she thought it was considerate. And whilst I would agree that some LL's/EA's are scammers plenty are not.

Fair comment, and analogy is a bit off the cuff, so maybe not the best. But they have proved they are bad enough by telling her she has no option but to sign the new contract and pay them a fee. That is missleading at best and simply a deliberate lie at worst. Anyone who trys to scam money as they are doing doesn't deserve to be treated fairly in return.

If she had said "My LA has said I can sign a new contract if I like. No need to, but the important fact is that it will give security for the next 6-12 months" then fine, they are playing fair and I would have a bit more sympathy for them. But they are not, they are lying about the contract and probably even lying about the cost of the advert.

G_M

DVardysShadow wrote: »

propertypooch did you actually give notice? Or did you give a general statement of you intentions and agree that you would give notice closer to the date? If you never actually gave notice, then I don't see that the money is due.

Absolutely! From what I understand you never actually gave notice. so why were they advertising?

And even if you DID - why should you pay for the advertising? Or for a new 'contract'?

Just stay put. You'll be on a rolling periodic tenancy for which no fee is payable, and premature advertising by the agent is their fault, not yours.

Procrastinator333

ashleypride wrote: »

If they need to sign a new contract, then it could be argued it is fair. If they don't then obviously it's not. I'm really not clear from the OP what the situation is.

TBH I hated renting through EAs and never found any of their charges 'fair'.

It was the comment from the other another thread from the same OP about being asked to sign a new contract. No mention of the option of just staying on a periodic tenancy (on the part of the LA).

I personally don't ever see the point in a 6 month AST apart from when you first move in. After that, what is the point (this does assume you pay rent and look after the place).

Either A) The LL wants the place back to sell or move in to. If this is true, you won't get the option of another contract.

or the LL wants to continue letting out the property. If you are a good tenant, why would they ask you to leave?

So what use is the 6 month protection. Maybe if it was 12 months under limited circumstance. I bet that 90% of all contract renewals are driven by the LA who wants a fee rather than either the tenant or LL.

ashleypride

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

But they have proved they are bad enough by telling her she has no option but to sign the new contract and pay them a fee.

But no where in the OPs post does it say they are asking them to sign a new contact. I'm not convinced the OP has terminated the oringal contact in which case they have no right to ask for any money as they'll stay on the rolling one.

If the OP has terminated the contract, then the EA can ask for a admin fee, as they have ever right to get a new contract signed for 6 / 12 months.

ashleypride

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

So what use is the 6 month protection. Maybe if it was 12 months under limited circumstance. I bet that 90% of all contract renewals are driven by the LA who wants a fee rather than either the tenant or LL.

Yeah, when we last rented some time ago, after 6 months our EA tried to get us to sign up for another 6 months and charge us £25 for the priviledge. Of course they made no mention that we could stay freely.

Jenniefour

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

.But they have proved they are bad enough by telling her she has no option but to sign the new contract and pay them a fee. That is missleading at best and simply a deliberate lie at worst. [/QUOTE

Yes, I would agree that telling a tenant they have to sign a new contract is not fair. Whether to renew is their choice. However, having two threads on this giving two sets of facts by OP I don't think has helped, because neither thread contains the full facts/context and I hadn't seen the other thread.