MSE News: Plans to ban letting agent fees unveiled

Crashy_Time

Pincher wrote: »

This is the general breakdown in business ethics.

Anything that can be abused will be abused, by low life time share salesmen. You clamp down on private parking, they just move on to the next thing.

There was an old scam, where they advertise a cheap accommodation, make you pay a non-refundable £50 registration fee, and then show you a truly disgusting flat, so you won't take it. Even if you are insane enough to want to move in, the flat is suddenly not available any more.

Foxtons used to be a decent company, until they were bought up by some slimy private equity company, who proceeded to squeeze as much profit as they can out of it. A few year ago, I could see Knight Frank try to jump on the charging tenants bandwagon, but fortunately the negative PR due to Foxtons made them back off. Instead, they changed the practice of taking their commission monthly, as the rent comes in, to grabbing everything in the first two months. It's a policy that says: we have our cut, any problems is your nightmare. There is usually a break clause, so the tenant can give notice and leave early. They are taking commission on money that may never come! A crooked agent could deduct an admin fee for refunding the partial commission, just like insurance companies try to do if you sell a car half way through a policy.

They can invent fees/charges at the drop of hat, how can you possibly keep up by legislation?[/QUOTE]


Seems to have worked in Scotland? Also if tenants go with private landlords there won`t be any agency fees. As agencies are starved of this income, that in many cases has probably been keeping them afloat, they will be forced to pressure people into dropping their asking prices so they can get some fees that way. Interesting times, seems like the whole housing "industry" is starting to eat itself?

vincit_veritas

I recently used the Deposit Protection Service arbitration service when the Landlord, via an agent, disputed the return of part of the deposit. The letting agent (in Winchester) had included a "checkout fee" of £57. There was no record of this either in the terms of their agreement with us, or in their own published scale of fees. I asked them to provide written justification for this charge, and received no response. They withdrew this element of their claim at the last minute: clearly, they had been prepared to try it on in the hope that I would just pay up for a quiet life. This behaviour seems to me to be the criminal offence of attempting to obtain a pecuniary advantage by deception. But ask anyone who's rented via an agent, and you will find many similar examples of what is, basically, thieving.
High time letting agents and their fabricated fees were cracked down on.

chattychappy

How jolly decent of Gavin Barwell to ban unfair and unjustifiable fees.

Of course it's a different story when the the government itself plays this game: http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/family/2017/04/probate-fees-to-skyrocket-from-next-month---but-parliamentary-challenge-is-lodged

LKRDN_Morgan

These are the fees charged by my current LA
Admin fee - £360 per applicant
Key cutting £12 (this is non negotiable unless we want to climb in windows for the duration of the tenancy)
Renewal fee £120 per applicant (for changing the date on the contract which is all done electronic. There isn't even the cost of stamps involved!!)
End of tenancy check out fee £175 per applicant
End of tenancy reference request £65 per applicant (because god forbid you might end up having to move and needing a bog standard copy and paste reference)

How any of the above is a true cost of the work they actually put in is beyond me. The sooner they ban them the better for renters

Miss_Samantha

What is the true cost of your TV?

LKRDN_Morgan

Miss_Samantha wrote: »

What is the true cost of your TV?

I thought this was about LA fees? Unless my TV is going to start charging me for replacing the batteries in the remote it's pretty irrelevant.

Miss_Samantha

LKRDN_Morgan wrote: »

I thought this was about LA fees? Unless my TV is going to start charging me for replacing the batteries in the remote it's pretty irrelevant.

It is very relevant: You are complaining that the amount you are charged does not represent the 'true costs' involved.

You forget about all the associated costs.

Then I have just pointed out your complaint should apply to every goods and services.

Complaining that fees charged do no represent 'true costs' is simply disingenuous.

parkrunner

So let's say fees are scrapped. The agent obviously still wants the same profit margin as before so surely will charge the LL more and the LL then ups the rent.

Victor_the_Gink

parkrunner wrote: »

So let's say fees are scrapped. The agent obviously still wants the same profit margin as before so surely will charge the LL more and the LL then ups the rent.

The market determines price, not the LL.

Miss_Samantha

Victor_the_Gink wrote: »

The market determines price, not the LL.

True. But note that many landlords do not price aggressively and that increases to cover fees would be small.