Agent agreed to reduced rent but didn't ask landlord

turtlemoose

We rent privately, £590 pcm. It's via an agent, but we do sometimes deal with the landlord directly - but try to avoid it as, while being a lovely bloke, his level of English makes conversation fairly difficult!

When we viewed the property, it was advertised at £595 - but had been empty for a while.

As we were looking to rent somewhere for a minimum of 3 years, we asked (at the viewing, Oct 2011) for a rent reduction based on the length of our stay. The agent said they would speak to the landlord and get back to us.

The agent called the next day and offered £590 for 6 months, and on the condition that rent was paid on time, then after that it would drop to £570 - we agreed this on the phone.

At tenancy sign up (end Nov 2011) we queried the rent again, just to be sure, and were told exactly the same thing - signed a 6 month agreement for £590 - and were told we'd have a letter confirming the reduction later in the week.

No letter arrived, so I chased via email - eventually received an email from the agent in Jan 2012 confirming the drop to £570 after 6 months.

The 6 months was up 24th April, and the new tenancy agreement which arrived in the post says £590. I rang to query, and was told that they agreed the discount with the landlord's son, but now they've spoken to the landlord who says if they had spoken to him (ie not his son) he wouldn't have agreed to it and refuses the drop.

Does anyone know where we stand legally on this?

Personally, I think if the agents have messed up (which is what I suspect, we've had quite a few problems with them), then we as tenants should not be penalised by having to pay more, but also the landlord shouldn't be penalised by having to receive less - and therefore they should make up the shortfall, due to it being their error.

The agent's attitude is that it's tough, and despite me asking them not to, they are now going to contact the landlord and tell him that we are "refusing" to accept the rent (errrr no!?) - so I'm now not happy that they are potentially damaging the relationship between us as tenants/landord. :mad:

Ringing the landlord ourselves isn't really an option, as mentioned before, the language barrier means that discussing something this complex just won't happen.

rentergirl

Report the agents to ARLA. Do you have a diary/log of calls? It isn't your fault, and you are dealing with the agent, so no matter what the landlord now says, I suspect you are entitled to the reduced rate.

The_Pixi

If you are signing a new agreement (not going on to a rolling contract) then you can try and haggle the rent down - however the rent can be anything the landlord wants, it just depends on if you are willing to pay it.

Sounds like the agents have just been spinning you lines to make you take the property.

Benji

Anything the agent says, is legally as if the landlord said it. The term 'agent' has a very specific legal meaning.

If the landlord has a problem with the agents actions, that is for them to sort out, but so far as you are concerned, your rent should be £570 (thank heavens for that email).

The relationship is the problem though. You can quite happily pay the reduced rent and if you were sued for the shortfall, the landlord would fail. However, bearing in mind the temporary nature of shorthold tenancies, you risk the possibility of eviction under section 21. As the tenancy is currently a periodic tenancy, you could receive a section 21 notice before 24th May for eviction at the end of July. Yes, you could concievably still be in the place 3 months later, but that is cost and hassle you can do without.

It saddens me to say that I think you'd be best negotiating/compromising - an extra tenner a month (say £580) may be much cheaper than being evicted.

princeofpounds

Anything the agent says, is legally as if the landlord said it. The term 'agent' has a very specific legal meaning.

If the landlord has a problem with the agents actions, that is for them to sort out, but so far as you are concerned, your rent should be £570 (thank heavens for that email).

Whilst you are generally right, I don't think it is quite as clear cut in this case.

A court may very well take the view that the promise of 570 was just that, a promise, and not a contract (which requires more than just an offer and an agreement).

turtlemoose

Thanks for all responses so far.

The agent are a joke to be honest - if I knew how terrible they would be, we wouldn't have taken this house - especially as we want to stay 3 years plus. We love the house, we love where it is, it is perfect for us - however we'd have carried on looking if we knew how bad the agents would be (and that we'd have to pay them £180 for the privelege of them causing problems!).

I have, since posting this, had an email from the agent saying they have spoken to the landlord (despite me asking them not to in the mean time, I said I'd contact him directly and get back to her) and have said this:

We would like to confirm that the landlord will be reducing the rent to £570.00, we would like to inform you that the landlord will be reviewing the rent after 6 months of the rent reduction.

So, ultimately I suppose we got what we wanted (ie rent reduction) - but now I am concerned at what cost to the relationship - and due to the language barrier, it's not like we can even ring the landlord about it.

When I spoke to the agent originally, she was totally ar5ey about it and said she would be telling him we refuse to pay etc etc etc - so I can only assume that this is what has happened. As I'm about to have a baby in a few weeks, the prospect of having to move house at the end of November is daunting to say the least.

Lesson learned in this one - a dodgy agent is worth avoiding a property for, as I now won't feel secure in the tenancy at all.

turtlemoose

Oh and rentergirl, they aren't members of ARLA (I've only just learnt what that is....another lesson learned for the future).

rpc

princeofpounds wrote: »

Whilst you are generally right, I don't think it is quite as clear cut in this case.

A court may very well take the view that the promise of 570 was just that, a promise, and not a contract (which requires more than just an offer and an agreement).

I don't really see the difference. The promise of 570 on renewal could be seen as a term in the original contract.

The OP could also argue that the rent reduction was a key part of their decision making process and they would not have taken the tenancy without it. The LL could then be estopped from increasing the rent.

Depends who can prove what and the LL/T relationship may not survive... LA should foot the bill (they did not act properly), but we all know they won't.

princeofpounds

I don't really see the difference.

The most obvious obstacle I can see would have been a situation where the agent talks about the 570 figure but was sufficiently ambiguous in their language as to whether it applied to the existing contract or the possibility of a new/renewed contract.

If a new contract, that would not have been remotely binding until signed. You have a written contract for 590 in place and that requires some pretty definitive evidence to be overturned.

I am not saying that it is impossible that the agent has agreed to amend the original contract terms. I am pointing out that there is a huge chasm of a grey area which, based on the information presented, is impossible to bridge.

"Your rent will be reduced to 570" is VERY different to "Your rent will be reduced to 570 when you renew your contract". One is a commitment and a contract, the other is effectively nothing more than an offer to negotiate.

jjlandlord

Not a legal expert, but the concept of promissory estoppel might have come into the picture.

wnoktnwbr

Something to remember is that the rent difference is £20, over a period of 6 months that's £120. £120 is less than a weeks rent for the property, so if you refuse to continue renting and the house is unoccupied for even 7 days they're losing money, considering you said it "had been empty for a while" when you rented it you can be absolutely sure that they're going to lose a lot more than £120 if they don't agree.

If this matters to you and you're feeling adventurous you could call their bluff, tell them that you're not interested in renewing the lease if they are unwilling to reduce the price to £570 as agreed. You should make sure to mention that £20 over 6 months is less than 1 weeks rent, maybe then they'll realise that this is a stupid mistake. Although you have to be ready to move out if they call your bluff.