Greedy Landlords-help

prudryden

A LL contracted with an agency shouldn't have any expenses except what needs to be done to the property to get it ready. Credit checks and references are paid for by the potential tenant. A check-in report(if the LL does one) would be paid for by the LL whenever a new tenant moves in.

Rebecca01

Thanks everyone.

I spoke to LL, as somebody said she changed the semantics of the wording and the extra rent has become the break clause fee.
She said it is to cover the following 're-letting the property/inventory costs/tenancy agreement/TDS scheme and any unused Let Only fees we have to pay the agency'.

All of which she would pay in two months anyway, not like it was even six months.

I emailed her back and said its not cost effective for me to move , i offered 300 to cover any costs. Hmmm

She mailed back and said she would take 500.

I think I should just accept that and be done with them, though my partner thinks we should stay to full term on principle, but yes we are lining their pockets but we are still saving two months rent (well nearly, less 500). My daughter starts her school in September anyway so the house would be empty so it seems pointless to prove a point.

Ulfar

I agree with your partner, if you can postpone moving.

If you have committed to the move then go. I would however want to see invoices for the costs, you should only be paying for extra costs that the landlord is incurring for you leaving early.

Now that I have had a think about none of the costs you have listed are extra, they are all costs the landlord would have to pay now or in the future so I wouldn't pay them. What I would agree to pay is the cost of any void period, from what you have said there isn't one. I might if they hadn't been so money grabbing offered to pay towards any advertising.

Rebecca01

They are just greedy, the only ll we have had that doesnt have a two month break clause policy anyway.

We cant stay beacuse of my daughters school and I dont think she will budge from this 500.

Maybe she will donate it to charity , right ! lol

They are pretty much using us to pay to get their new tenant in.:mad:

property.advert

I had one try that on me and I just told them that I'd be living there until the date they wanted paying up to. They backed down.

may_fair

Ulfar wrote: »

I would however want to see invoices for the costs, you should only be paying for extra costs that the landlord is incurring for you leaving early.

The LL is free to demand a sum of money in exchange for agreeing an early surrender. The payment may be described as 'rent' or 'costs' but essentially all it is is a payment for agreeing the surrender, and LL doesn't have to justify it or prove it. If T refuses to pay, then he will remain liable for rent for the remainder of the fixed term (or until the property is re-let, whichever is the sooner).

may_fair

Rebecca01 wrote: »

Thanks everyone.

I spoke to LL, as somebody said she changed the semantics of the wording and the extra rent has become the break clause fee.
She said it is to cover the following 're-letting the property/inventory costs/tenancy agreement/TDS scheme and any unused Let Only fees we have to pay the agency'.

All of which she would pay in two months anyway, not like it was even six months.

Ending a contract early increases the frequency of turnover of tenants.

E.g. in a 24 month period, there might be 4x 6 month tenancies back to back, and 4x changeover costs. If each of the Ts left after four months instead of six, that'd be 4x lots of changeover costs (and hassle) in a 16 month period, probably more voids, too.

So, just because LL would have had to 'pay in two months anyway', it doesn't follow that there are no cost consequences for the LL for you breaking the contract early.

And remember, you're the one who wants to get out of the contract.

Ulfar

may_fair wrote: »

The LL is free to demand a sum of money in exchange for agreeing an early surrender. The payment may be described as 'rent' or 'costs' but essentially all it is is a payment for agreeing the surrender, and LL doesn't have to justify it or prove it. If T refuses to pay, then he will remain liable for rent for the remainder of the fixed term (or until the property is re-let, whichever is the sooner).

Completely agree with you, however the OP states the property has been re-let for the day after they leave. This is why I think the Landlord is taking the !!!!.

may_fair

Ulfar wrote: »

Completely agree with you, however the OP states the property has been re-let for the day after they leave.

We don't know whether a contract has actually been agreed. If not, there's no certainty as to whether the prospective tenancy will go ahead.

Rebecca01

may_fair wrote: »

We don't know whether a contract has actually been agreed. If not, there's no certainty as to whether the prospective tenancy will go ahead.

In this case, I would understand, but according to the agent all checks have been done and they are moving in the day after we move out.

We actually wanted to move later but they had already given notice on theirs, and us thinking we would saved money agreed to the earlier date.

Ulfar is very right, but we live and learn.