Letting agency advice (Extortion)

Conrad

nirajn123 wrote: »

He is already living there - and wants to stay as a long term tenant, why does he need to pay 'renewal' when the law allows you to move to a periodic tenancy?

yes for their own benefit, while trying to prevent what can be easily democratised - but as I said I am optimist, there will come a time when that will change with right set of tools at customers disposal. That, is when I will call a free market at play.

Can someone remind me, isn't this site dedicated to consumer power?

Only last week George Monbiot argued we need a less demanding work place environment, that society must allow this. Charging lower fees would pile more pressure on the owners and in turn the staff to make do with less and so society would be worse.


Many a liberal lefty argues for higher wages for workers, who do you think will pay those higher wages?


Consumer power must not come at the price of worse wages and more pressures for workers. Be happy you are paying more to ensure staff can be paid more.

Guest101

nirajn123 wrote: »

He is already living there - and wants to stay as a long term tenant, why does he need to pay 'renewal' when the law allows you to move to a periodic tenancy? - Because you said he wants to stay there as a LONG TERM tenant, whereas periodic is short term, very short term in some cases.

yes for their own benefit, while trying to prevent what can be easily democratised - but as I said I am optimist, there will come a time when that will change with right set of tools at customers disposal. That, is when I will call a free market at play. - A private company, trying to benefit themselves?! Flog them and send them of to Australia!

Can someone remind me, isn't this site dedicated to consumer power? - No it's dedicated to money saving. Pay £70 to renew, or pay £300 to move. Money saving.

You want https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer

Innys1

djpleasure wrote: »

In a free market you can charge up to what people will pay? what rubbish, it is not what ""People will pay" you are forcing the hand. A letting Agent should look after its Landlords and Tenants. Quoting Free Market does not make it right and it is exactly this kind of abuse that will end the so called free market and force regulation, the losers will be the Landlords and Agents, how the tables will turn.

Petition signed and shared on FB, cannot wait for the day that Letting Agencies and Landlords are Regulated. Your day will come, mark my words.

A letting agent has no responsibility to the tenant - they are employed by the landlord.

We've been waiting for the tables to turn for the best part of 25 years ago when I started out as a landlord. I've not seen it yet.

Finally, yes, it is a free market - albeit with limited supply. In that scenario, a landlord will usually charge what the market will bear. They'd be foolish not to. In the same way that Apple charges astronomical prices for what are, in essence, consumer electronics - nothing more.

nirajn123

Consumer power must not come at the price of worse wages and more pressures for workers. Be happy you are paying more to ensure staff can be paid more.

Check OPs original post and see if you still want to say this.

I am not a lefty, and believe that people should get paid for the work they do and if someone wants to go places and achieve things by working hard (or even inheriting) good luck to them. But as a consumer I demand value for my money and if EA wants to earn more they need to provide valuable service to the customers rather than putting people through what OPs is complaining about. As far as my experience of 8 years letting goes this isn't happening (with one notable exception in Edinburgh - all others where in England), how do you expect people to pay for services where they don't get value for money - if the right sort of alternatives exists then people will use those over traditional EAs - that is the free market one would like to see, EAs can still compete if they think they have right package on offer.

mrginge

i'm with jj on this one. The last thing we need is interference in a perfectly fine and functioning market.
Just because many consumers are left with a choice between paying fees to an agent to maintain the status quo or alternatively risk having to move and therefore paying more out, so what?
It's hardly exploiting these scummy tenants by saying pay me £100 or we'll evict you and it'll cost you much more.
That's just the good old free market and a bit of enterprising, out-of-the-box thinking that we need more of in this country.

There's nothing more damaging to an industry than regulatory interference. I mean, look how the government have shafted all those perfectly legitimate payday loan companies.
Light touch regulation, that's what we need. Never did the banking industry any harm!

nirajn123

Because you said he wants to stay there as a LONG TERM tenant, whereas periodic is short term, very short term in some cases.

Whatever he wants he can arrange that in one single contract there is no need for renewals, if only EA bother to listen to their customers

A private company, trying to benefit themselves?! Flog them and send them of to Australia!

What!?? I am not talking about 'a company' I am talking about new technology which will provide more options to consumers

No it's dedicated to money saving. Pay £70 to renew, or pay £300 to move. Money saving.

Saving money for things I don't need, no thanks. And the site is about Consumer power - moneysaving is one aspect of it.

Are you an EA in disguise? If you are then I don't have an issue with it as long as you are providing right sort of services and charging fairly to your customers.

jjlandlord

mrginge wrote: »

It's hardly exploiting these scummy tenants by saying pay me £100 or we'll evict you and it'll cost you much more.

This is a rather poor comment.

As said and repeated, the issue is the aggressive sales tactics used by agents.
They bluff. If you call they bluff you won't be evicted in 99% of the cases.

Guest101

nirajn123 wrote: »

Whatever he wants he can arrange that in one single contract there is no need for renewals, if only EA bother to listen to their customers - Yes it cane be. Then why wasnt it when he or she first moved in?

What!?? I am not talking about 'a company' I am talking about new technology which will provide more options to consumers - Right, but you said running scared to open their own portals. They werent running scared, they were capitalising on the situation

Saving money for things I don't need, no thanks. And the site is about Consumer power - moneysaving is one aspect of it.- Then you dont need longer term seurity? im confused.

Are you an EA in disguise? If you are then I don't have an issue with it as long as you are providing right sort of services and charging fairly to your customers. - Im probably one of the most pro tenant posters on here. And even i find it ludicrous that you want security for a long term, but not pay for it

No im not an EA

mrginge

jjlandlord wrote: »

This is a rather poor comment -

As said and repeated, the issue is the aggressive sales tactics used by agent.
They bluff. If you call they bluff you won't be evicted in 99% of the cases.

Fixed for you.

Trying to justify a claim of a functioning free market using the logic that a threatened consumer should just call a bluff is a bit weak.
We're not dealing with a tin of beans. Housing's a fundamental necessity !!!!!!.

jjlandlord

mrginge wrote: »

Trying to justify a claim of a functioning free market using the logic that a threatened consumer should just call a bluff is a bit weak.

'threatened'? !!!!!! indeed.

People should not be left alone in any negotiation, then, as clearly they cannot handle it.