Managed let Agent problem

Flibbertygibbet

Can anyone advise:

I have a joint interest with my brother in an inherited property. It has been on the market 5 months. It has had 8 viewings and 6 offers within 10% of asking price so the asking price must be realistic. All three accepted offers have had bottom of chain collapse.
The agent now has a further buyer who agreed to buy it subject to it being let. This buyer has pulled out once before when he declared himself a cash buyer, has now negotiated his price down again and insisted on the let being in place.

I agreed an assured tenancy with 6 month break clause with the lettings department. If buyer pulls out we are reluctant Landords.
15 minutes before the tenants were due in to sign, the agent rang my brother to say the tenants wont go ahead without a 12 month contract with 3 months notice. She had rung him as she was aware that we wanted 6, he agreed and told her to ring me to confirm my position. She didnt. I left a message on her lettings section office line ansaphone, also on the sales department ansaphone AND emailed within the 15 minutes I had. Later I found her mobile number and left a message on that before close of business that day, all with the same theme, you are not to sign the tenant on my behalf before discussing this with me. That was Thursday 4.00pm, she had let us know that she was on annual leave on Friday, Mon Tuesday before this situation occurred on Thursday.

Can anyone advise what my position is? I made a verbal contract with them for the 6 months. I do not know which professional bodies they belong to but I dont see arla anywhere on their literature. Who else should I be aware of. I know its too early for the ombudsman. It may never be a problem if the buyer completes but I want the option of giving notice to put back on the market next Spring if we end up in the pooh. say what professional bodies I can contact about this?

Thanks for reading

KRB2725

Why did it need to be tenanted before you sold? The buyer should have got his own tenants after completion.

Somebody who knows more than I will undoubtedly correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought most mortgage companies wouldn't accept anything other than vacant completions? If you have any doubts about his "cash" purchase then I would get this checked.

Other than that, the agent can tell a prospective tenant what they like, but unless you have signed a tenancy agreement then you shouldn't have a problem.

poppysarah

Sounds way too dodgy - why can't they put the tenant in.

Flibbertygibbet

Yes I have signed a tenancy agreement, but the verbal contract was for the 6 months. The agents advised us the sale can be done this way. The agent wants to sell after all and get the double whammy on the let.

KRB2725

What does the tenancy agreement say?

Flibbertygibbet

Well thats the million dollar question.

I live way away from the property so signed the agreement before the tenants details ETC were written in so I wouldnt have to return to sign on the day. The agent was always going to sign on my behalf.

This is my point, I only had a verbal contract for 6 months, it is what I understood myself to be signing for. The agent knew that or she would not have phoned my brother to ask his permission to go ahead on 12...it wouldnt have been necessary to ring if 12 had been agreed previously.
As he told me "she rang in a bit of a panic as she thought it was a deal breaker" and he was very surprised she hadnt phoned me when he rang to see if I had agreed too.:eek:

G_M

Mad mad mad mad!

If the buyer wants to be a landlord, fine - he should buy the property and become a landlord.

Expecting you, the seller to commit to a tenancy, with all the legal consequences and obligations, makes no sense.

No sensible LL would do this - to start with, the seller (you) has no long term interest in the tenant so has no reason to vet them and find a 'reliable' tenant (except of course, that you might be lumbered with them when the buyer pulls out!)

You are making a huge gamble. Don't do it.

Lower you price and sell normally.

Or become a landlord, do it properly and keep the property.

edit: if, however, you have already signed a tenancy agreement, I assume you have considered, and complied with, everything in this post here?........

As for the validity of the tenancy agreement - you authorised an agent to act on your behalf. You are bound to whatever tenancy agreement they have put in place on your behalf with the new tenant. If they have acted outside their authority or gone against your instructions, then you may have an action for damages against the agent. But that will not affect the tenancy, or the tenants rights.

And I suspect it would be a hard, expensive and stressfull fight in court.

The lesson of course, is to select your letting agent with care, to make sure they are professional, and to make sure your instructions to them/contract with them are unambiguous.

Becoming a landlord is not something to take on lightly, as a quick fix to appease a dodgy buyer.

Flibbertygibbet

G_M wrote: »

make sure your instructions to them/contract with them are unambiguous.

Well that is probably the nail on the head.
There are in effect three parties as Landlord. Buyer, my bro and myself Buyer and brother agreed and she thought she could do as she liked. Better to ask forgiveness than permission. Hence no phone call.

So verbal contracts are not binding anymore?

princeofpounds

There is no professional body. LAs are not professionals (in its true sense of having an independent self-regulating body guarding a profession with a body of knowledge). They might sign up to some voluntary schemes but that's about it.

So what is your position? If the agent signed for you then you are bound by the tenancy. Make sure you are aware of your obligation and that you are meeting them (gas safety, etc).

You then have to see how your relationship with your LA was defined. This will be in the contract. If you expressly say in there that they need to seek permission from BOTH of you and did not then if you suffer a loss as a result you should first complain, and then potentially sue. Basically you need to show a breach of contract and also a material loss caused by that breach.

I agree with all the others, getting a tenant in to suit a potential buyer is plain weird. Are you SURE the buyer, LA/EA and the tenant are totally unrelated parties?

G_M

Flibbertygibbet wrote: »

Well that is probably the nail on the head.
There are in effect three parties as Landlord. Buyer, my bro and myself Buyer and brother agreed and she thought she could do as she liked. Better to ask forgiveness than permission. Hence no phone call.

So verbal contracts are not binding anymore?

Yes they are binding, but I'm unclear who you had the verbal contract with. The tenant? Or the agent? It sounds to me like you gave the agent verbal instructions to sign a 6 month contract with the tenant, no?
So - has the agent actually signed a tenancy agreement, on your behalf, with the tenant? For 12 months?

Or did you have a verbal contract with the tenant for 6 months? In which case, are you saying the agent has now given the tenant a 12 month contract?

Either way, if the agent has issued a 12 month written contract and both the agent and tenant have signed, then this would superceed any earlier verbal contract.

Remember, legally the agent is acting for you, so it is as if YOU issued the tenant the 12 month contract from a legal perspective. The tenant can rely on the agent as if he was dealing with you direct - that's why it's called an "agent".

And no - there are NOT 3 parties involved as landlord: just you and your brother. The 'buyer' has no legal involvement unless and until he buys!

may_fair

I'm with G_M. Completely confused as to what's been agreed betwen whom.