LL Advice please regarding Letting Agent

moneysavinmonkey

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

You could quote them back stating that the term of the tenancy was 6 months and that there was no signed extention of the tenancy.

Ask them for proof of a tenancy extension.
They should not be able to provide any proof

the proof of the tenancy extension is that the tenants are still there paying rent! :rotfl:

IveSeenTheLight

moneysavinmonkey wrote: »

the proof of the tenancy extension is that the tenants are still there paying rent! :rotfl:

Do they pay rent to the LA or directly to yourself?

Either way, I still see this as the original tenancy and no extension.
I'm sure if you read the tenancy, you should see that the tenancy allows for the tenancy to continue past the initial 6 monts without the need to extend.

RabbitMad

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Ask them for proof of a tenancy extension.
They should not be able to provide any proof

This might be a goer.

(I was watching a program once where a lottery syndicate won 7 million and the guy the bought the ticket kept it. Other syndicate members tried to take him to court but it was thrown out as they had no real evidence of the win. One of them lost their house as costs were awarded against them.)

moneysavinmonkey

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Either way, I still see this as the original tenancy and no extension.
I'm sure if you read the tenancy, you should see that the tenancy allows for the tenancy to continue past the initial 6 monts without the need to extend.

moneysavinmonkey

RabbitMad wrote: »

This might be a goer.

If the TENANTS are legally occupying the property (ie paying there rent and there by agreement verbal or written) then there is a TENANCY!

you can only prove the tenancy was not extended if you can prove that
the tenants moved out and/or didn't pay rent after the initial 6 month term.

to reiterate:
a TENANCY is lawful occupation of a property
A TENANCY AGREEMENT is a piece of paper giving the terms of lawful occupation but is not necessary to create a tenancy

see:

If the landlord accepts rent from you for living in the property, then any verbal agreement you have made counts as a legal agreement. It will be either a tenancy or a licence
http://england.shelter.org.uk/advice/advice-3179.cfm#wipLive-10065-3

RabbitMad

moneysavinmonkey wrote: »

the proof of the tenancy extension is that the tenants are still there paying rent! :rotfl:

But if the rent is paid directly to CB1979 the LA has no proof of a tenancy extension. The LA has to prove a tenancy extension CB1979 does not.

And my 3rd defence point in my other post was saying that if CB1979 could show that the LA's regularly misled prospective LLs it would add weight to his argument that he was told the same. If it goes to court the judge would be looking at the balance of probablities and may well side with CB1979.

RHemmings

CB1979 wrote: »

I/we agree to pay Leaders a Tenant Introductory fee which is calculated as 8% of the rent payable for the term of the Tenancy and any extension thereof, subject to a maximum fee equal to 8% of the rent payable for one year.

This does sound to me that you have to pay the second £451, provided that your tenants stay for a full second six months or more.

Sounds like money for jam to me though. Did they bust a gut getting you tenants, or did they put a card in their window and let you show the tenants around?

RHemmings

RabbitMad wrote: »

But if the rent is paid directly to CB1979 the LA has no proof of a tenancy extension. The LA has to prove a tenancy extension CB1979 does not.

If the EA sues CB1979, then to keep up this story CB1979 would have to lie in court. That's a pretty serious crime to commit to try to avoid paying £451. Particuarly since it is probably easy to gather evidence that the tenants are still living at the property.

CB1979_2

as you say it's money for old rope, as they said it was 8% for an "introduction service" i asked what else did that entail, they explained credit checks & taking first payment & deposit and nothing else.

the tenants pay me direct as i said i got told it was purely an "intro" only

i did my own inventory and decided against renewing the contract when they sent me a letter about it, as i have very good tenants.

i'm going out to get my initial contract with them and also read up about the +VAT cos as you say it doesn't say anything about + VAT on the terms i highlighted.

RabbitMad

RHemmings wrote: »

If the EA sues CB1979, then CB1979 would have to lie in court. That's a pretty serious crime to commit to try to avoid paying £451. Particuarly since it is probably easy to gather evidence that the tenants are still living at the property.

No CB1979 applies to get the case dismissed as the LA has no real evidence that tenancy has been extended without saying it hasn't been.

Obviously CB will need to speak to proper solicitor rather than the armchair variety like ourselves which might make this an economically unviable proposal. However bluffing this might mean the LA backs down.