Guarantor request by LL for student accomodation

aquitaine

tacpot12 wrote: »

It is not an insurance policy you are being sold. You are being asked to be a co-signatory to a legal contract granting a tenancy.

I agree we are not being sold an insurance policy. We are being miss-sold a rental agreement which includes unfair conditions which were not disclosed prior to signing. These conditions require unlimited liability to cover any rent defaults or damage caused by persons unknown. It is being demanded that we provide a free insurance policy of the sort which the landlord could easily obtain on the open market but wants us to provide for free.

aquitaine

BrassicWoman wrote: »

It's not insurance; no premium is being paid. The estate agent will be a broker for a FS company which is why they are regulated, but they don't work directly in FS as they only broker.

These are the technicalities on which you will lose.

A better argument is that the guarantee is inherently unfair. Unfortunately you have the option of just not signing it - so it is not illegal!

Just because no premium is being paid it does not mean it is not insurance. Have you seen the Citroen ads where they offer free insurance?

Miss_Samantha

aquitaine wrote: »

No. There is another alternative. To challenge this nefarious practice and hopefully save some people in the future from being caught in the same trap.

This isn't a 'nefarious' practice. This is what a joint tenancy is in law, neither the agent or landlord is making it up.

Nebulous2

It's not 'now' quite common, it has been common for at least 30 years, since my peers were looking for flats.

You either sign it or he finds somewhere else who don't require it.

My daughter has just gone through a prolonged search for a flat. Small buy-to-letters asked for a remarkable amount of personal info (CVs a letter saying why they wanted it and interviews) and then gave flats to someone else. A professional landlord showed them around, told them there and then they could have it, if they paid £50 each deposit. He then produced a lease and didn't ask for a guarantor at all - although I had fully expected to be one.

So this has turned some of my perceptions on their head. The casual buy-to-let people have wanted blood and the professional landlord, with a big portfolio and an office, who I would have expected to be more aggressive has been entirely reasonable and treated them like adults.

aquitaine

Miss_Samantha wrote: »

This isn't a 'nefarious' practice. This is what a joint tenancy is in law, neither the agent or landlord is making it up.

If tricking a gullible 19 year old into signing a contract that would need to put the family home at risk without warning him of the consequences is not nefarious practice then I don't know what is.

Miss_Samantha

No-one's tricking anyone. He might be 19 but he should learn that you do not go out and commit to a big expense (being a tenancy, a car, etc) without having done a minimum of homework on how things work. As a parent you could also have helped.

As said, joint tenancies are what they are. Either you accept the risks (or mitigate them by choosing joint tenants carefully) or you rent individually.

There isn't much more to discuss, really.

GwylimT

The conditions are very fair for a student rental, your son will find it incredibly hard to find a landlord who doesn't require all tenants to have a guarantor. My son had a mate who had parents who wouldn't be guarantors, he ended up living in a caravan on someones driveway as landlords simply would not accept students without a guarantor and he had missed the deadline for second year university housing.

My son was a medical student and I was his guarantor for four years.

GwylimT

aquitaine wrote: »

Just because no premium is being paid it does not mean it is not insurance. Have you seen the Citroen ads where they offer free insurance?

It isn't free at all, you simply pay one payment, instead of multiple payments. Do you genuinely believe its free?!

GwylimT

aquitaine wrote: »

If tricking a gullible 19 year old into signing a contract that would need to put the family home at risk without warning him of the consequences is not nefarious practice then I don't know what is.

I would have thought that a 19 year old university student was capable of reading both a tenancy agreement and a guarantors agreement, obviously not.

mozza78

Parents acting as guarantor has been happening since I went to uni over 20 years ago so its clearly not so bad a practice that it has been outlawed as yet.

Presumably your son signed the agreement which had the named conditions attached. You keep saying he's an innocent 19 year old but perhaps he should take at least some share of your ire being of adult age and signing for something without your consent which clearly affected you etc?