Letting agency fees - do I have a claim?

tsolrm

Comms69 wrote: »

Ofcourse they did. Why don't you post a screenshot of the money going into your account?

Sounds difficult, can I just give you the password to my bank account instead?

tsolrm

tom9980 wrote: »

It doesn't mean you are right or indeed would have won in court. The agent obviously decided spending a day in court and having someone potentially cause harm to their reputation not worth the time and cost.

Of course I would have.

martindow

tsolrm wrote: »

Sounds difficult, can I just give you the password to my bank account instead?

Thank you. The username and the bank would also be helpful.

Comms69

tsolrm wrote: »

Sounds difficult, can I just give you the password to my bank account instead?

No thanks. Like I said, it's all well and good coming back to say things worked out exactly as you said they would, but without any reference as to why

tsolrm

Comms69 wrote: »

No thanks. Like I said, it's all well and good coming back to say things worked out exactly as you said they would, but without any reference as to why

But I explained why? I got charged a vaguely defined admin fee which goes against the Consumer Rights Act. I don't feel like they carried out the service that I paid for so I asked for a refund. They said it's not their problem (even though the tenancy agreement was provided by them and they handled the deposit money) with which I disagreed and said that I will challenge the entire fee amount claiming breach of Consumer Rights Act (which protects exactly against this kind of thing where the terms of their service is vaguely defined to absolve the service provider of all responsibility)

So I informed them that I will be taking them to court and offered a settlement. They disagreed with what I said but paid up in full. I assume that they had my emails reviewed by their legal team because it did take them a week to respond.

Comms69

tsolrm wrote: »

But I explained why? I got charged a vaguely defined admin fee which goes against the Consumer Rights Act. - So you claim. The reality is that the consumer rights act does not require a detailed breakdown of the fee, just that the fee is clear. It's no different to any other service, IE a plumber charging £65 call out fee. I don't feel like they carried out the service that I paid for so I asked for a refund. - They did, you applied for a property, they processed your application, you received a tenancy agreement. The rest is irrelevant They said it's not their problem (even though the tenancy agreement was provided by them and they handled the deposit money) - they are correct. they are providing a service, not a tenancy. with which I disagreed and said that I will challenge the entire fee amount claiming breach of Consumer Rights Act (which protects exactly against this kind of thing where the terms of their service is vaguely defined to absolve the service provider of all responsibility)

So I informed them that I will be taking them to court and offered a settlement. They disagreed with what I said but paid up in full. I assume that they had my emails reviewed by their legal team because it did take them a week to respond.

They don't have a legal team. Someone decided that it's cheaper to pay you than waste time fighting it. I promise you that the reality is your case had almost no legal basis upon which to bring a claim.


The courts look at the reality of the situation. You paid a fee to apply for a property, they did whatever was needed and you got a tenancy. Your contract with them was very basic. "Pay £300 and we will process this application." thereafter your contract was with the landlord, and ONLY the landlord.

tsolrm

Comms69 wrote: »

They don't have a legal team. Someone decided that it's cheaper to pay you than waste time fighting it. I promise you that the reality is your case had almost no legal basis upon which to bring a claim.


The courts look at the reality of the situation. You paid a fee to apply for a property, they did whatever was needed and you got a tenancy. Your contract with them was very basic. "Pay £300 and we will process this application." thereafter your contract was with the landlord, and ONLY the landlord.

That is called a service. Where there is a service that was charged, there is an implied contract. Do you understand how contracts work? Jeeeez

Comms69

tsolrm wrote: »

That is called a service. Where there is a service that was charged, there is an implied contract. Do you understand how contracts work? Jeeeez

Yes I do, funnily enough. - hence why I said: "Your contract with them was very basic."


Which is exactly my point - they fulfilled their contract to you. So I still don't see what your claim actually is

parkrunner

tsolrm wrote: »

The letting agency has settled for the full amount that I was asking for before this reached the courts. Thank you to everyone for your 'super valuable advice'. I'm surprised that people from 'moneysavingexpert' forum think that it is completely fine to get charged poorly described/defined fees, not receive the service that you think you pay for and then swallow it. Good luck.

Yeah right.

tsolrm

Comms69 wrote: »

Yes I do, funnily enough. - hence why I said: "Your contract with them was very basic."


Which is exactly my point - they fulfilled their contract to you. So I still don't see what your claim actually is

I don't think you do. I don't think you, or anyone who have responded in this thread actually know much about how contracts work. Any ambiguity in any contract always goes against the person who drafted the contract. The service was advertised and defined poorly and it was not clear what the admin fee actually pays for. What does 'processing of the application' mean? Does that include the inventory check? Handing over the keys? Or are those separate charges? This is exactly what the Consumer Rights Act stops in its tracks - these entities have to detail the service that they provide. If they do it poorly - it goes against them if those fees are disputed.