Late rent charge

eddddy

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Could they claim those costs from the OP? Aren't those the costs of managing the property which is what the landlord is already paying the agent to do?

I'm referring to additional costs which arose purely because the OP paid late...

....because presumably the OP breached the contract (AST) which said the OP had to pay on a particular date.

If one party breaches a contract, the other party is entitled to claim their reasonable consequential losses.

But they cannot charge 'fines' or 'penalties'.

need_an_answer

scaredofdebt wrote: »

I would expect a large reason for rent payments being late is due to the tenant having financial difficulties, so making them pay in essence what is a fine is only going to exacerbate the problem. Still, if it makes a few quid in the short term.

I am a landlord and my tenant (who I would consider a good one) has been late paying the rent 2 or 3 times in the past 4 years, each time they've contacted me about it citing problems with their bank and they've made the payment a day or two later.

I am happy with that, it's not costing me anything apart from a small amount of worry and as long as the tenant is up front about it then no problem.

As a tenant myself when I was in my 20s, I know what it's like, a bit of empathy goes a long way.

Legally, unless the contract explicitly states the interest is payable daily, it would be assumed to be annually and in any case I suspect they are legally obliged to show the APR as banks are with their "fines".

5% a day would be a nice APR!

IANAL

I totally agree with you however where the situation may be different I assume you and indeed I do not use a managing agent for rent collection whereas the OP's LL clearly does.

Pixie5740

eddddy wrote: »

I'm referring to additional costs which arose purely because the OP paid late...

....because presumably the OP breached the contract (AST) which said the OP had to pay on a particular date.

If one party breaches a contract, the other party is entitled to claim their reasonable consequential losses.

But they cannot charge 'fines' or 'penalties'.

What exactly are landlords paying for when they plump for a fully managed service if not for the occasional letter or phone call?

I find it difficult to believe that it would cost the letting agent £5 to £20 to send out what is probably a template letter or make a phone call that's if they even did either of those things. Not that it matters because the way the tenancy agreement is drafted won't result in the OP paying anywhere near as much as £5.

need_an_answer

Pixie5740 wrote: »

What exactly are landlords paying for when they plump for a fully managed service if not for the occasional letter or phone call?

I find it difficult to believe that it would cost the letting agent £5 to £20 to send out what is probably a template letter or make a phone call that's if they even did either of those things. Not that it matters because the way the tenancy agreement is drafted won't result in the OP paying anywhere near as much as £5.

Its not until you look into what you actually pay your LA to manage the property that some LL's actually have a lightbulb moment and say "you know what I can do this"

I went fully managed for the first year on my first property before I decided to exit.
I suppose for some its not easy to self manage but actually if you are able to its a big cost saving and much easier to deal direct and quickly with the tenant without the middleman layer

I also don't think that a lot of LL's especially those who are not confident realise that there are other options like tenant only find which again is a big cost saving from fully managed.

In my neck of the woods fully managed agreements are offered in preference by a lot of agents almost to the point that unless the client mentions other options they are not offered anything else

eddddy

You're confusing lots of different things.

Pixie5740 wrote: »

What exactly are landlords paying for when they plump for a fully managed service if not for the occasional letter or phone call?

You're referring to the contract between the LL and agent. That's irrelevant here.

The contract which may have been breached is the one between tenant and LL (the AST).

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Not that it matters because the way the tenancy agreement is drafted won't result in the OP paying anywhere near as much as £5.

You're confusing 2 separate things.

1. Fees stated in the AST - i.e. contractual charges
2. Costs (damages) as a result of breach of contract (which won't be stated in the contract)


But, by law, if you breach a contract, you are liable for the resulting costs.

Whether a breach of contract has occurred depends on how the AST/contract is worded.

Pixie5740 wrote: »

I find it difficult to believe that it would cost the letting agent £5 to £20 to send out what is probably a template letter or make a phone call that's if they even did either of those things.

Yes - there is the follow up question of whether the costs (damages) are reasonable.

The OP needs to find out what the agent did as a result of the late payment, whether what they did was reasonable, and whether the cost the agent quotes for doing it is reasonable.


Edit to add..

The agent cannot make a profit or charge a penalty in damages resulting from breach of contract.

Pixie5740

eddddy wrote: »

You're confusing lots of different things.




You're referring to the contract between the LL and agent. That's irrelevant here.

The contract which may have been breached is the one between tenant and LL (the AST).



You're confusing 2 separate things.

1. Fees stated in the AST - i.e. contractual charges
2. Costs (damages) as a result of breach of contract (which won't be stated in the contract)


But, by law, if you breach a contract, you are liable for the resulting costs.



Yes - there is the follow up question of whether the costs (damages) are reasonable.

The OP needs to explain what the agent did as a result of the late payment, whether what they did was reasonable, and whether the cost the agent quotes for doing it is reasonable.


Edit to add..

The agent cannot make a profit or charge a penalty in damages resulting from breach of contract.

The contract with the landlord is not irrelevant because the letting agent is not legally charge both the landlord and the tenant for the same thing.

If the letting agent wanted to charge a cost per phone call or per letter those costs should be specified in the tenancy agreement or at least in the letting agent's front of office and/or website. That said, the OP hasn't actually mentioned the letting agent sending either a letter of making a phone call. It's quite possible that as the rent was only 2 days late (yes I know that's still 2 days too many) that the letting agent did neither.

Cakeguts

There is probably more to this than is stated here. I would guess it is not the first time but I don't know. The reason why I think there is more to this is because managing agents usually ask for rent to be paid by standing order. It looks as if there isn't a standing order in place here.

wesleyad

Pixie5740 wrote: »

The contract with the landlord is not irrelevant because the letting agent is not legally charge both the landlord and the tenant for the same thing.

Is this bit true? What about when the tenant renews and the LA charges a renewal fee to both LL and tenant?

Pixie5740

wesleyad wrote: »

Is this bit true? What about when the tenant renews and the LA charges a renewal fee to both LL and tenant?

Yes it is true and the letting agent should only, at most, be charging one sucker a renewal fee.

eddddy

wesleyad wrote: »

Is this bit true? What about when the tenant renews and the LA charges a renewal fee to both LL and tenant?

This is going way off topic...

... but if two (or more) people have contractually agreed to pay a letting agency to do the same thing - that's absolutely fine. They both must pay.

That is perfectly legal under contract law - unless some kind of deception was involved.


(But that's not really relevant to the OP's situation.)