Renting - what is your opinion on this exchange?

Smodlet

OP, I don't blame you for still being sick of the way you were treated. I found your queries and the way they were worded reasonable. The trouble is as others have stated: LLs and particularly LAs have everything their own way and it is beyond high time they were vetted and regulated within an inch of their lives before they are allowed to screw a penny out of those desperate enough to have to rent privately.

Still, "No experience is a waste if you learn from it", according to some; I can think of many I would willingly have avoided as they taught me nothing I did not already know but there it is. Next time, you will approach an LA as a diplomat to Afghanistan would... Scum that they are.

franklee

This is hard to gauge as we do not know what was said in the initial conversations or in the "smoothing over" phone call. I suspect the call was more fraught than the OP realises, even if the OP felt he was was polite in wording he could have come across differently as the situation clearly got to him

From emails alone, assuming the fees and pet deposit were all declared upfront, I do not see why the OP needed to make the queries after earlier agreement.

His reasoning is off too.

First off is the inventory fee, which we have assumed is £50 given that the check in fee is £50 and the check out and inventory fee together is £100.

Clearly drawing up the inventory, checking a tenant in and checking a tenant out are three separate activities. Why assume what they cost, that should have been listed already? I do not understand what the OP is trying to say.

The property is unfurnished except for the cooker and wardrobe. So what are you asking us to pay you for?

Am unfurnished property still needs an inventory. There is the state of the carpets/floors and decor for every room, cleanliness for every room, and kitchen appliances and units, outside, garden etc. etc.

Pet deposit cleaning charge, sounds lie this wasn't fully explained or understood. Adding it to the deposit sounds fair to me.

Don't think the fees are that bad for London but they are so often a rip off. Better to ban charging tenants directly for them as there is currently no incentive for the landlord (who chooses the agent) to care what they are. Roll them up with the rent and the landlord will care about fees when choosing the agent or his property will be uncompetitive.

madvicker

Thanks all for your replies - a range of perspectives and comments. All taken on board.

franklee - just to clarify for you:

The initial conversations were standard fare for renting out a property. The fees and deposits were mentioned up front. The £200 for our cat was described as a deposit, and any deductions from it would be at cost for the cleaning. But then the wording on the contract was 'pet cleaning charge' rather than 'pet deposit'. So that is why I was worried, as of course a deposit is entirely reasonable - less so for an upfront charge.

As for the inventory fee (which was lumped in together with the checkout fee at £100) - at the time I didn't feel there was any work involved in drawing up an inventory for an unfurnished house. Obviously I was wrong, but I wanted clarification why they were charging for an inventory.

iammumtoone

madvicker wrote: »

The initial conversations were standard fare for renting out a property. The fees and deposits were mentioned up front. The £200 for our cat was described as a deposit, and any deductions from it would be at cost for the cleaning. But then the wording on the contract was 'pet cleaning charge' rather than 'pet deposit'. So that is why I was worried, as of course a deposit is entirely reasonable - less so for an upfront charge.

As for the inventory fee (which was lumped in together with the checkout fee at £100) - at the time I didn't feel there was any work involved in drawing up an inventory for an unfurnished house. Obviously I was wrong, but I wanted clarification why they were charging for an inventory.

Reading it again I do think that you caught the higher up on a bad day. Yes your email could have been worded differently/softer but you did not swear and were not abusive. I don't think you deserved the reaction you got, it was a bit extreme, especially as you had already agreed to the extra money and were satisfied with the explained already given.

Tigsteroonie

It was three years ago. Why are you letting it bother you now?

madvicker

Tigsteroonie - because we are still renting this place but are halfway through buying our own house. Our tenancy was coming up for renewal and old demons reared their ugly heads - as always happens whenever we need to speak to them, there is a tension that can be cut with a knife at times. Thankfully it appears to be water under the bridge now. They have been very reasonable in letting us go onto a periodic tenancy until the house purchase either happens, or falls through.

Pixie5740

madvicker wrote: »

Tigsteroonie - because we are still renting this place but are halfway through buying our own house. Our tenancy was coming up for renewal and old demons reared their ugly heads - as always happens whenever we need to speak to them, there is a tension that can be cut with a knife at times. Thankfully it appears to be water under the bridge now. They have been very reasonable in letting us go onto a periodic tenancy until the house purchase either happens, or falls through.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

How reasonable to allow you to exercise either your statutory rights or contractual rights.

madvicker

I know my rights but unfortunately as others have said, renting is not a renters market, regardless of what the law entails. It's the best outcome we could hope for. Say we didn't renew and the house purchase fell through they would serve us notice without a doubt. Then we would need to find another place that would accept pets, and couldn't rely on a reference from the agents. It wouldn't be worth the hassle or the potential risk of being made homeless, even though we would be well within our rights to stay on as periodic and wait out any notice period they gave.

Pixie5740

madvicker wrote: »

I know my rights but unfortunately as others have said, renting is not a renters market, regardless of what the law entails. It's the best outcome we could hope for. Say we didn't renew and the house purchase fell through they would serve us notice without a doubt. Then we would need to find another place that would accept pets, and couldn't rely on a reference from the agents. It wouldn't be worth the hassle or the potential risk of being made homeless, even though we would be well within our rights to stay on as periodic and wait out any notice period they gave.

Your contract is with the landlord not the letting agent. The letting agent can issue the Section 21 notice on the landlord's behalf but it's the landlord who would have to go to court to get a possession order. Would a landlord really go to the hassle of evicting a paying tenant? I don't think so but I suppose it depends on your appetite for risk.

I wonder if the letting agent also charges the landlord for the privilege of getting you to sign a new fixed term contract?