We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Letting agent terms
Comments
-
Yes. Good idea. Ask them for legal advice and then when they give you their legal opinion that you own them the money, pay.
I never mentioned asking Townends for legal advice.
I was simply going to ask them why they felt the Foxton's case did not apply. That's not the same as asking for legal advice.0 -
Oh, and the amount is relevant.
The ruling referred to a "large sum of money" in respect of the renewal Foxtons were charging, see page 4 of this document.
http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/Foxtons/stakeholder-letter.pdf
Yes, large is subjective, but 11% in the Foxtons case versus 5% in my case is not really in the same ballpark, IMHO.
I suspect Townends have reviewed the Foxton's case and done just enough to ensure they don't fall foul of it.0 -
OK.
Pay the fee.
(and stop wasting our time.)0 -
theartfullodger wrote: »Surely the whole point of the Foxton;s case was that if a landlord was "small-time" (like me, only 4 houses..) he could argue he was consumer & not business: Foxton's got done by OFT under unfair terms stuff didn't they???? See..
http://landlordlaw.blogspot.co.uk/2009/07/oft-victory-in-foxtons-unfair-contract.html
(Tessa...)
I stand corrected!
I guess my recollection of my readings on the topic a few years back must be confused with something else.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards