Guarantor request by LL for student accomodation

tykesi

aquitaine wrote: »

Are you saying it is OK for a letting agent to demand that a tenant take on huge risk without advising them of the fact? I think it you who is getting confused. Perhaps you should try and address a subject which is less demanding.

The thing is, they will have advised them of the fact - in the wording of the contract. Just because your son didn't read it and understand the risks involved doesn't mean it wasn't there to be seen.

I realise this post is probably a waste of time due to your overriding mindset that you & your son are the victims here and complete unwillingness to accept any sort of blame for the predicament.

I bet you're a hoot at dinner parties.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

Bossworld wrote: »

Isn't this just par for the course for a student style let?

7 years this summer since I graduated but from what I remember, if everyone pays their rent, no one leaves the house early and the place is in the same condition as you found it, there will not be any issues, and the whole guarantor part becomes, well, academic.

What does your son make of your actions preventing him from moving in with his mates?

That's a big "if", though. I can perfectly see why he doesn't want to do it. It's his son's fault for committing himself and paying money over before actually asking him (unless the son was told no guarantor was necessary, which I doubt).

aquitaine

Bossworld wrote: »

Isn't this just par for the course for a student style let?

7 years this summer since I graduated but from what I remember, if everyone pays their rent, no one leaves the house early and the place is in the same condition as you found it, there will not be any issues, and the whole guarantor part becomes, well, academic.

What does your son make of your actions preventing him from moving in with his mates?

It's not me who is preventing him, it is the estate agent. They clearly didn't teach you how to analyse a simple proposition at your uni. I should demand your money back.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

aquitaine wrote: »

I came here seeking constructive comments, not spiteful put downs from people who seem to enjoy the plight of others. A robust response to such spiteful behaviour is entirely justified. Anyway, none of us are complaining about it so mind your own business.

Go read the contract.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

aquitaine wrote: »

It's not me who is preventing him, it is the estate agent. They clearly didn't teach you how to analyse a simple proposition at your uni. I should demand your money back.

Go and read the contract.

You're right though, you are not preventing him. The lack of a guarantor is. It doesn't have to be you. It's almost certainly his own fault for not understanding what he was being asked for. You won't know that for certain though until you READ THE CONTRACT.

DoaM

ScorpiondeRooftrouser wrote: »

I am assuming the advanced rent will be returned; it doesn't seem like he has asked for that yet.

I don't believe this deposit is that sort of a deposit, but a holding deposit, which has completely different rules. Although we don't know, because he hasn't read the contract.

I believe that's covered by the last sentence of my post you quoted ... unless Consumer legislation is overridden by some other legislation?

aquitaine

tykesi wrote: »

The thing is, they will have advised them of the fact - in the wording of the contract. Just because your son didn't read it and understand the risks involved doesn't mean it wasn't there to be seen.

I realise this post is probably a waste of time due to your overriding mindset that you & your son are the victims here and complete unwillingness to accept any sort of blame for the predicament.

I bet you're a hoot at dinner parties.

I am considered to be something of a raconteur at dinner parties and even do the occasional paid engagement. Thank you for the kind words.

If I thought this was our fault I would happily admit it. What I don't like is being shafted by a bunch of spivvy estate agents in shiny suits.

DoaM

aquitaine wrote: »

I came here seeking constructive comments, not spiteful put downs (1) from people who seem to enjoy the plight of others. A robust response to such spiteful behaviour is entirely justified. Anyway, none of us are complaining about it (2) so mind your own business.

(1) Otherwise called ... people who don't agree with me are spiteful.

(2) Not as far as you are aware. That's not to say someone hasn't reported any of your posts. (For the record - I have not).

Bossworld

aquitaine wrote: »

It's not me who is preventing him, it is the estate agent. They clearly didn't teach you how to analyse a simple proposition at your uni. I should demand your money back.

I'm not sure how you would help my cause, but I suggest you look into a GCSE English Language course, so you can gain a proper understanding of the correct auxiliary verb to use in any given context.

Perhaps the flakey basis for your crusade stems from your inability to comprehend the language in the contract?

:money:

aquitaine

DoaM wrote: »

(1) Otherwise called ... people who don't agree with me are spiteful.

(2) Not as far as you are aware. That's not to say someone hasn't reported any of your posts. (For the record - I have not).

Not at all, most people who don't agree with me are perfectly reasonable. In fact a bit of robust verbal jousting is quite fun. I hope you are enjoying it.