Landlord Making me pay rent before move in

andyuk01

The difference is a day?

If so take it on the chin and move on, kicking up a fuss early on over a minor point like this puts you on a path to a S21 in 6 months times and considerably more in expenses finding somewhere new

Guest101

wannahouse wrote: »

our tenants put in an offer to rent our place, from x date.
we accepted.
but they mucked around for ages with referencing and getting in documents etc, that dragged it out, so ended up moving in one week later, but the agreement was drawn up for the agreed upon initial date, and thats the rent that was expected.
their offer was to rent from x date, so thats what they were expected to pay.
we would have let it to someone else instead that would have moved in sooner.
the tenants expected to pay rent from x date, however, and it was explained to them by the agent that despite their delaying getting in documents, they would still have to pay from the original date agreed as they had held up the property and cost us loss of rent because of their messing around ,so they knew the score.
when we have rented properties ourselves, we have agreed a move in date from which we expect to pay rent, and if the delay was due to me, i would expect to pay rent from that date, however, if someone else caused the delay, i would say that would be unfair, and the date should be renegotiated when the references come back.

If u signed the TA and accepted rent, then the referencing is redundant. The tenant has an AST. SO whats the problem.

Or you were refusing them access to their property?

wannahouse

Guest101 wrote: »

If u signed the TA and accepted rent, then the referencing is redundant. The tenant has an AST. SO whats the problem.

Or you were refusing them access to their property?

they didn't sign an astor pay any monies until the day they moved in, but if they wanted the property held for them, they needed to pay rent from the day they said they would take it from....

otherwise a tenant could muck around for a few months getting things to you...
they have been in there a few months , paying rent, and one of the tenants still hasn't moved in, but plans to in a while!!!

i have nothing to do with any of that anyway...
the tenants agreed what they were happy with , with the agents and went from there...
they are all professionals, one of them being a solicitor, so i'm sure they can look after their own interests.

if they weren't happy, they would have gone elsewhere,and someone else would have moved in straight away, as is the market in london.

the OP also has that choice.

we weren't happy, when we moved into the place we currently rent, to find out the watersupply to the house had had it and we had no cooker for weeks, so we negotiated a rent free period with the landlord.
if you're not happy, speak up, if not, get on with things...

Manchee

andyuk01 wrote: »

The difference is a day?

If so take it on the chin and move on, kicking up a fuss early on over a minor point like this puts you on a path to a S21 in 6 months times and considerably more in expenses finding somewhere new

I totally agree. Unless your rent is stoopidly expensive, 1 day so really isn't worth arguing about. Is that extra 20 quid or whatever really worth the time it would take to contest it and the possibility of starting off on the wrong foot?

avablue

The problem is not just the money, the issue is that they are having the contract start on a day in which in reality it does not actually start. My issue with this is that they have now pushed the move in date till next week but want to say on the tenancy contract that it started today. If this was my fault it would be one thing but pushing the move in date back because their office took their time with referencing is not right. The issue with the rent is that if they say tenancy started on the 16th they can charge me 2 weeks + the 1st months rent at the start of tenancy. However if now starts at the later date of next week then it would be 1 weeks rent+ 1st months rent which is the difference of £200.

Shelldean

random thought... what happens if you fail the reference check?
Will they just hand the money back? I somehow doubt it

G_M

Sadly LLs like you exist, and result in tenants thinking all LLs are money-grubbing ******s!

wannahouse wrote: »

our tenants put in an offer to rent our place, from x date.
we accepted.
but they mucked around for ages with referencing and getting in documents etc, that dragged it out, so ended up moving in one week later, but the agreement was drawn up for the agreed upon initial date, and thats the rent that was expected.
Then that's when access should have been granted.
With or without references.
Indeed, you are lucky you were not sued. You'd have lost.

If you were unwilling to grant access till the references were complete, then you should have delayed the tenancy start date.

their offer was to rent from x date, so thats what they were expected to pay.
But you had not agreed to let the property from this date. You delayed your agreement pending reference checks.

we would have let it to someone else instead that would have moved in sooner.
Perhaps. But probobly not. By the time you realised their references were taking longer than expected, if you had then re-advertised, re-referenced someone else, the tenancy would have been even further delayed.

the tenants [STRIKE]expected[/STRIKE]hoped to start the tenancy [STRIKE]to pay rent [/STRIKE]from x date, however, and it was explained to them by the agent that despite their delaying getting in documents, they would still have to pay from the original date agreed as they had held up the property and cost us loss of rent because of their messing around ,so they knew the score.
This is part of business. And you base your business on the contract, not on some initial wish-list you or the the customer starts out with
when we have rented properties ourselves, we have agreed a move in date from which we expect to pay rent, and if the delay was due to me, i would expect to pay rent from that date, however, if someone else caused the delay, i would say that would be unfair, and the date should be renegotiated when the references come back.

:shocked:

Manchee

avablue wrote: »

Yes, I have no problem with paying the rent and deposit in advance. What I have problem with is having to pay rent and having my tenancy legally start on a date that I cannot access the property on. I am trying to figure out what is legal here-can they have the tenancy start on a date in which I am not yet allowed to enter the flat? This is the email they sent me

"The move in has now been changed the 17th due to this information. If we can get it referenced and all documents completed we may be able to achieve this. However the Tenancy agreement and payment will be dated as the 16th due to the offer being accepted for that date."

avablue wrote: »

The problem is not just the money, the issue is that they are having the contract start on a day in which in reality it does not actually start. My issue with this is that they have now pushed the move in date till next week but want to say on the tenancy contract that it started today. If this was my fault it would be one thing but pushing the move in date back because their office took their time with referencing is not right. The issue with the rent is that if they say tenancy started on the 16th they can charge me 2 weeks + the 1st months rent at the start of tenancy. However if now starts at the later date of next week then it would be 1 weeks rent+ 1st months rent which is the difference of £200.

So is the delay 2 weeks or 1 day?

avablue

The situation has now been sorted. They had wanted to change the move in date from today (16th) to 17th which we did not have an issue with. Then today they came back and said they wanted to push it back further to 23 August to allow themselves time to finish referencing. However, they wanted me a agree to a contract that stated the move in date being the 16th, they also wanted me to start paying rent from the 16th. Whilst this was going on, they also added on an extra £70 of fees which we did not think was fair. My lawyer spoke with them today and was able to work out that the move in date needed to be reflected accurately on the contract and that I would not be paying rent for days which I did not have access to the property. They also were able to get the landlord to refund the added on fees.

wannahouse

G_M wrote: »

Sadly LLs like you exist, and result in tenants thinking all LLs are money-grubbing ******s!

:shocked:

thanks for that!
if you read my post below that, you would see that WE have nothing to do with finding tenants or making agreements about move in dates etc.
that is sorted and agreed between the agents and the tenants, and NO ONE signed any tenancy agreement until the day they moved in.
we were given the application forms to look at and see if we were happy with it, and told the date they were offering to take the flat from, and we pick them as tenants, out of the different application forms we were presented with.
the agents deal with the rest of it, reference them , and check them in, and we only found out after the fact, that they did not move in until a little later, so the deal was made btwn the tenants and landlord and notthing to do with us being "money grubbing greedy landlords!"

i also mentioned one of the three has been paying rent YET STILL hasn't moved in 3 months later,as she is off holidaying and doing other things, so i don't think they are obviously bothered if they have money to throw about renting a place, yet not even living in it.

your comment calling us money grubbing landlords is also out of order, as our apartment is beautifully decorated and furnished and also has a private designed outdoor roof terrace half the size of our flat, yet we charge the same rent as the other 3 bedroom flats that look like absolute dives, with awful, sparse furnishings, as we are interested in attracting the RIGHT tenants rather than just attracting top dollar, so we never have voids, and we have new tenants always lined up months in advance to rent it, when are leaving.

people can vote with their feet, if they don't like something, and i personally think that in the OP'S case, it was unfair to suggest they would charge her for rent, as she had done her part and not caused any delays.
in our case, the tenants had WEEKS to get their info in to the agent, as they were lined up 6 weeks in advance before the end of the residing residents tenancy, but were too lazy to bother sending something in , and had to be chased for everything.

we have personally rented 17 places ourselves to live in over the years in 3 different countries, and every time we have put in an application, we have been asked to specify what date we are offering to take it from, which is obviously something the landlord will consider, when reviewing the applications, as most people are not going to wait 2 months for a tenant to move in and start paying rent, when they have an applicant they can chose with an earlier date.
in every case, we have paid from the agreed date,some places we wanted to secure the property, but it was available before we were ready to move, but we negotiated the difference with the landlord, and one place we had signed the tenancy agreement and we due to move in, but weren't able to, due to a problem with the water supply to the house, and in that situation, although the tenancy had already started, we negotiated a rent free period until the problem was rectified, as the house was not habitable.

the key to successful renting/ letting, is negotiation, with both parties being happy.
we never screw anyone over, and we always get quality tenants, who pay on time, and are HAPPY.
they may not send their forms back on time, but they are happy, and they have a good deal with our flat being much nicer than they could rent in the development for the same price, so if you asked the tenants, i'm sure they would agree they are well looked after.

OP i am glad you managed to get it sorted out!