Guarantor request by LL for student accomodation

aquitaine

Miss_Samantha wrote: »

Under English law, if you are responsible for destroying an airliner you are liable for the full cost without limit.

If you are a tenant and set fire to the property then you are liable for the full cost without limit.

Even if the assets are insured, the insurance may be entitled to go after you for the loss you caused.

Yes, that's all well and good but this mob are demanding that you accept full liability should one of the other passengers destroy the airliner.

GwylimT

aquitaine wrote: »

My understanding is that they have already let to him. Or are we expected to pay landlords £1,000 or so for nothing in return?. And they do want unlimited liability (which they aren't going to get). It is them who are being unreasonable.

Still ignoring the fact that a landlord is just following the procedures required by their insurance company?

GwylimT

aquitaine wrote: »

Wouldn't you then go to another insurer? It seems pointless to me to pay insurance then for the insurance company to demand that someone else takes on the risk. I know the insurance industry regards us all as stupid marks who are there to be fleeced but that is really going too far.

All insurance policies for properties let to students require a guarantor. You wont be fleeced unless your son has been raised with no respect for other peoples property.

Pixie5740

aquitaine wrote: »

My understanding is that they have already let to him. Or are we expected to pay landlords £1,000 or so for nothing in return?. And they do want unlimited liability (which they aren't going to get). It is them who are being unreasonable.

Your understanding which is formed on information from an unreliable source (your son). Have you read what it is your son has signed yet? If your son loses any money it will probably be down to breach of contract i.e. failure to provide a guarantor as per the contract.

As for this talk of unlimited liability what do you think your son and his friends would do to the property? Have you raised a barbarian?

The landlord wants a guarantor, you don't want to be a guarantor, never the twain shall meet. Tick tock, your son is running out of time to find somewhere else to live that won't require a guarantor.

csgohan4

This has been great Early morning read, thanks OP

aquitaine

csgohan4 wrote: »

This has been great Early morning read, thanks OP

You are more than welcome. It is rather enjoyable isn't it?

aquitaine

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Your understanding which is formed on information from an unreliable source (your son). Have you read what it is your son has signed yet? If your son loses any money it will probably be down to breach of contract i.e. failure to provide a guarantor as per the contract.

As for this talk of unlimited liability what do you think your son and his friends would do to the property? Have you raised a barbarian?

The landlord wants a guarantor, you don't want to be a guarantor, never the twain shall meet. Tick tock, your son is running out of time to find somewhere else to live that won't require a guarantor.

I'm not sure that people should be described as barbarians just because they look at student accommodation online rather than in the flesh. As for running out of time, Uni doesn't start again for a month or so so there is plenty of time yet. This whole letting model looks a bit flawed to me. Trying to get members of the public to underwrite your assets without them realising it doesn't strike me as having a very bright future. I bet not 5% of people who have signed these guarantees realise what they have taken on.

aquitaine

GwylimT wrote: »

All insurance policies for properties let to students require a guarantor. You wont be fleeced unless your son has been raised with no respect for other peoples property.

Why would anyone buy an insurance policy which isn't going to insure anything and just attempts to push the risk onto an unsuspecting member of the public? As I said above, I bet not 5% of people realise what they have signed up to.

BeatTheSystem

aquitaine wrote: »

I'm not sure that people should be described as barbarians just because they look at student accommodation online rather than in the flesh. As for running out of time, Uni doesn't start again for a month or so so there is plenty of time yet. This whole letting model looks a bit flawed to me. Trying to get members of the public to underwrite your assets without them realising it doesn't strike me as having a very bright future. I bet not 5% of people who have signed these guarantees realise what they have taken on.

Have you looked into this:

https://www.housinghand.co.uk/guarantor-service/

I have not but I understand that some landlords accept it. Not sure what the consequences for your son would be if he fails to pay rent or damages the property but at least you family home and wealth would not be at risk.

GwylimT

aquitaine wrote: »

Why would anyone buy an insurance policy which isn't going to insure anything and just attempts to push the risk onto an unsuspecting member of the public? As I said above, I bet not 5% of people realise what they have signed up to.

Of course it insures, which is why the landlord gets a pay out if for example the property is damaged and that damage would cost more than the excess.

If the damage turned out not to be accidental and caused by the tenant the insurance company would persue the tenant (as they would in a non-student let) if the tenant refused to pay for damage they caused they can then persue the guarantor. If the damage was caused by someone else they would persue that person if they are found. The reason policies for student lets require a guarantor is because they have a high rate of not paying rent and damaging properties.

Your house is insured I assume? If someone comes in and trashes your house your insurance will pay out, if the person is found via the police for example the insurance company can claim the costs back from the person.

If not 5% of people know what it is, they're reading age must be incredibly low, so low in fact they probably don't have the mental capacity to sign anything without someone with POA over seeing.