Tenancy Fee Troubles

neilperks

Hi Everyone!

I have recently found a suitable property to rent in my local area via Rightmove and, after reading the information provided regarding fees, (Admin charge £50 and Referencing fee £75 plus vat) I contacted the letting agent for a viewing.

I contacted the agent following my viewing, to express my interest in renting the property, who explained the fees had increased to £200 because,

"we have had a spate of people applying for properties and pulling out at the last minute. So we increased the amount to prevent this from happening"

I insisted that I was only willing to pay £150, as advertised, initially and the letting agent reluctantly accepted. I paid this over the phone via my debit card.

I have now been informed that my application has failed due to adverse credit and I will require a guarantor to continue with my application.

After checking my credit file online, I have not found any adverse credit which would affect my application. Furthermore, I do not have anybody to act as a guarantor ...not that I'd be rude enough to ask in the first place!

The agent has also informed me that they cannot refund the £150.

Is there anything I can do?

Guest101

neilperks wrote: »

Hi Everyone!

I have recently found a suitable property to rent in my local area via Rightmove and, after reading the information provided regarding fees, (Admin charge £50 and Referencing fee £75 plus vat) I contacted the letting agent for a viewing.

I contacted the agent following my viewing, to express my interest in renting the property, who explained the fees had increased to £200 because,

I insisted that I was only willing to pay £150, as advertised, initially and the letting agent reluctantly accepted. I paid this over the phone via my debit card.

I have now been informed that my application has failed due to adverse credit and I will require a guarantor to continue with my application.

After checking my credit file online, I have not found any adverse credit which would affect my application. Furthermore, I do not have anybody to act as a guarantor ...not that I'd be rude enough to ask in the first place!

The agent has also informed me that they cannot refund the £150.

Is there anything I can do?

Yes ask for proof of the this adverse credit.

Since agents only check public records such as CCJs and Bankrupcy, it is very rare to fail on this point. Usually people are failed on affordability, however since alot of agents are 'lax' with their affordability criteria, it is a de facto fail, and this is not allowed.

For example, you apply with a wage of £16,000 PA, they're affordability criteria is 17,000 PA, they should not have run the checks and informed you immediately that you would fail.

Also all fees must be publically displayed (including online, on adverts and in the office premises), i would complain to the scheme they are members of to say that the advertised fees are not what they charge.

Pixie5740

I thought letting agencies had to publish their fees along with a description of each fee and whether or not the fee includes VAT. Fair enough you ended up paying the advertised fee but they shouldn't be advertising one fee and asking for another. Shysters.

I'd write to them and challenge the decline due to adverse credit if you are confident that your credit files do not show adverse credit.

If you don't get anywhere then raise a complaint with whichever redress scheme the letting agent is registered with.

jjlandlord

It is quite simple:

Either you are willing to pay the fees as asked and you apply for the property, or you are not and you move on and look for another property.

Then, if you apply and they reject your application, tough. They don't have to explain their decision.
They should, though have clearly stated what would be refundable in such case.
However, it seems implied that a 'referencing fee' is not refundable unless specifically agreed.

Whatever the reason they declined, you should realise that the 'referencing process' starts the moment you make contact with them, like when looking for a job.
Someone who starts by arguing about the fee does not exactly make a good impression... What will he do when repair is needed, etc?
The more you 'challenge' their decision the more you will reinforce it.

Guest101

jjlandlord wrote: »

It is quite simple:

Either you are willing to pay the fees as asked and you apply for the property, or you are not and you move on and look for another property.

Then, if you apply and they reject your application, tough. They don't have to explain their decision.
They should, though have clearly stated what would be refundable in such case.
However, it seems implied that a 'referencing fee' is not refundable unless specifically agreed.

Whatever the reason they declined, you should realise that the 'referencing process' starts the moment you make contact with them, like when looking for a job.
Someone who starts by arguing about the fee does not exactly make a good impression... What will he do when repair is needed, etc?
The more you 'challenge' their decision the more you will reinforce it.

References fees should not be used as a cash cow by agents. I think everyone agrees on that. Primarily this goes against their duty to the Landlord to find a tenant.

I concede that they must find a suitable tenant. Which is why i always consider what criteria the letting agent has presented to me when looking to rent. I.E. if they havent, i will ask.

There's no point wasting the time, or taking the money, from an applicant who simply does not meet the criteria. This practice should be made unlawful.

The process should be.
1: establish criteria suitable to the Landlord.
2: when receiving enquiry, provide criteria to the prospective tenant
3: if the tenant matches the criteria, conduct checks. What the checks should do is 'check' the information provided. Is it accurate, was anything missed off.
4: if accurate, offer tenancy. if not accurate, they have failed the 'check' and are either rejected, or offered additional criteria.

- Checking against unknown criteria is wrong. The OFT i suspect would think so too. And since the tenant is paying the agent for this service, they are a consumer.

jjlandlord

'should', 'should', 'should'... Perhaps, it isn't the case right now and isn't unlawful.

Guest101

jjlandlord wrote: »

'should', 'should', 'should'... Perhaps, it isn't the case right now and isn't unlawful.

No it's not. I was careful to use 'should'

As a landlord, if you used an agent, you would want that agent to act in your best interests (which they have to. But often are only seen to be doing so), rejecting suitable tenants and building a bad reputation as being a 'rip off', will make this more difficult.

You as the LL will have an empty property for longer, suitable tenants may, and probably will, tell others of the negative experience, which leaves you with a limited selection of tenants (once the agents have filled their pockets & finally present you with a tenant)

This isnt even a post about consumer rights, or pro tenant / evil landlords, its actually about agents who make life more difficult for both parties in order to progress their own goals.

neilperks

Thanks for your replies, I really appreciate it.

I have spoken to the letting agent again today who have offered to refund me £75 by cheque, within 7 working days.

They also admitted to me that the Landlord would probably have not gone ahead with a guarantor even if I could have provided one, which makes me shudder to think what would have happened if I'd stumped up the additional guarantor fees!

Looks like I've got away lightly, but I would have preferred the full £150 refunded.

Annie1960

neilperks wrote: »

Thanks for your replies, I really appreciate it.

I have spoken to the letting agent again today who have offered to refund me £75 by cheque, within 7 working days.

They also admitted to me that the Landlord would probably have not gone ahead with a guarantor even if I could have provided one, which makes me shudder to think what would have happened if I'd stumped up the additional guarantor fees!

Looks like I've got away lightly, but I would have preferred the full £150 refunded.

You should insist on the full £150 refund.

AleMrsT

Annie1960 wrote: »

You should insist on the full £150 refund.

I agree with Annie on this one. I work for a letting agent, and alarm bells are ringing at the appalling behaviour of this agent.

They cannot just decide to increase their fees.
Unless you signed a disclaimer stating that the fees are non-refundable in their entirety, push for a full refund.
Data Protection would not have allowed them to share the information with you that they obtained about you from the referencing process, but you are within your rights to request the written report from the referencing agency directly.

Pixie5740

What part of the Data Protection Act would prevent the OP from obtaing the information that the LA holds about the OP?