Sick of Lettings Agents

JonnieHACK

Post removed due to creepy profiling of user in question.

cheltenhamgirl

weegie.geek wrote: »

The letting agents act as a go-between between yourself and the landlord. They're responsible for making sure the rent is collected, and the landlord does everything they're meant to do. If either party doesn't fulfil their end of things, they're supposed to ensure they do. Chase you for the rent, chase the landlord to fix things that break.

Why bother going with a letting agency - and paying extra for it - otherwise?

Weegie.geek we meet again!

Can I just do tiny weeny little bit of sticking up for letting agents for a second. I am in no way advocating bad letting agents. HOWEVER, what I do want to talk about is the situation with the damp houses. When I was a letting agent (hiss boo, I know), if we felt the house wasn't safe, and the landlord wouldn't do anything about it, we wouldnt' take it on to our books (generally more hassle than they're worth). The trouble starts when any property becomes unsafe Ie damp, bad electrics etc etc once the property's been let (we're not surveyoprs so can't know everything there is to know about houses - if it's not evident to you, it's probably not evident to me either). We are unable to MAKE anybody do anything. WE can 'advise' the landlord of his responsibilities, but how do we MAKE them do something they don't want to do? Basic answer, we can't. We can put pressure on tenants to pay their rent. However, we can't MAKE them pay it. We are AGENTS - acting on behalf of the landlord, and can therefore only do as instructed by our client, the Landlord, and only then if it is legal.

We had a couple of properties that 'developed' signs of damp whilst tenants were living in them. I repeatedly told my landlord, and explained his responsibilities to the tenant. however, he wasn't interested. What would you suggest I do in that situation? Go around to his house, forcibly drag him to my car and take him to the property and sit and watch him until he carried out work himself? Illegally take money from the rent that we get in order to get someone in to fix it? We were very stuck in the middle as agents, and I am very pleased to no longer be a lettings agent.

Anyway, that's my little rant over, sorry!

JonnieHACK

Post removed due to creepy profiling of user in question.

weegie.geek

cheltenhamgirl wrote: »

Weegie.geek we meet again!

Can I just do tiny weeny little bit of sticking up for letting agents for a second. I am in no way advocating bad letting agents. HOWEVER, what I do want to talk about is the situation with the damp houses. When I was a letting agent (hiss boo, I know), if we felt the house wasn't safe, and the landlord wouldn't do anything about it, we wouldnt' take it on to our books (generally more hassle than they're worth). The trouble starts when any property becomes unsafe Ie damp, bad electrics etc etc once the property's been let (we're not surveyoprs so can't know everything there is to know about houses - if it's not evident to you, it's probably not evident to me either). We are unable to MAKE anybody do anything. WE can 'advise' the landlord of his responsibilities, but how do we MAKE them do something they don't want to do? Basic answer, we can't. We can put pressure on tenants to pay their rent. However, we can't MAKE them pay it. We are AGENTS - acting on behalf of the landlord, and can therefore only do as instructed by our client, the Landlord, and only then if it is legal.

We had a couple of properties that 'developed' signs of damp whilst tenants were living in them. I repeatedly told my landlord, and explained his responsibilities to the tenant. however, he wasn't interested. What would you suggest I do in that situation? Go around to his house, forcibly drag him to my car and take him to the property and sit and watch him until he carried out work himself? Illegally take money from the rent that we get in order to get someone in to fix it? We were very stuck in the middle as agents, and I am very pleased to no longer be a lettings agent.

Anyway, that's my little rant over, sorry!

If that's the case, what does a letting agent earn money for, and why should someone use an agency rather than rent directly from the landlord? It's more convenient for the landlord, especially if they have multiple properties, but where's the benefit to the renter? Pay more rent but get no benefit.

The OP knows two people who rent from this agency - the properties may or may not be owned by the same landlord - who've got bad damp problems.

The letting agency should be fighting for the rights of whichever party has been wronged, and recouping the costs of this from the perpetrator.

I appreciate that as an agent you might have done all you could to get the landlord to fulfill his duties, but as the tenant's only point of contact, it's still your responsibility. If that's the way the system is, the system needs changed.

cheltenhamgirl

weegie.geek wrote: »

If that's the case, what does a letting agent earn money for, and why should someone use an agency rather than rent directly from the landlord? It's more convenient for the landlord, especially if they have multiple properties, but where's the benefit to the renter? Pay more rent but get no benefit.

The OP knows two people who rent from this agency - the properties may or may not be owned by the same landlord - who've got bad damp problems.

The letting agency should be fighting for the rights of whichever party has been wronged, and recouping the costs of this from the perpetrator.

I appreciate that as an agent you might have done all you could to get the landlord to fulfill his duties, but as the tenant's only point of contact, it's still your responsibility. If that's the way the system is, the system needs changed.

There is no benefit to the tenant to using letting agents really I guess, as you're not our client, the landlord is. But if we've go the property you want, you'd need to use us. I would always use an ARLA agent because then you are protecting yourself a little and know you are using an agent who are reputable. There are a lot of dodgy private landlords around as well, so you're stuck either way I know (ps I rent too)

I'd like to know how anyone would say I can make the landlord do something he doesn't want to do? You're just saying 'we should'.....but how?! Physically make him?

In response to OP's questions, letting agents make money in several ways, but what they shouldn't ever do (and I suggest if you know agents that do, you fight it) is earn interest on your money. A deposit (I left lettings well before this tenancy deposit scheme thing happened, so will be behind the times now), has to either hold the deposit in a non interest bearing account (ie earn no interest on it at all), or at the end of the tenancy, return deposit with interest. Most agents I know, do the first as it's much easier. If you believe this isn't happening, you are well within your rights to ask for proof that it is.

xx

cheltenhamgirl

weegie.geek wrote: »

The letting agency should be fighting for the rights of whichever party has been wronged, and recouping the costs of this from the perpetrator.
quote]

To a certain extent I agree, but our main duty is to our client - the Landlord. We can't just 'steal' money from the landlord, just because we don't agree with how he's running his property. Just like you can't walk into a shop and take things just because they've done something that you don't believe is right. It just doesn't work that way. A reputable agent will never be happy about damp etc in properties, but sometime's there just isn't a lot you can do about it.

xx

EagerLearner

Mmm, I used an ARLA agent once and they were not trustworthy nor did they carry out the checkout properly when we left. They ignored our calls and did not chase the landlord much and disregarded our intentions to go to court. In the end we went and they had to pay their legal fees, except they then passed those on to the landlady... who 1 year later we got into court too. I also however understand that some landlords are scum and letting agents cannot make them do anything (as they're the letting agents boss...). Tenants are the ones with the least rights as someone else has their deposit... and posession is 9/10's of the law...

Good luck OP in finding a place - have you tried GumTree? We found our current (lovely) flat and landlady through there. Free ads and you can search local property for rent too.

Fergie73

To a certain extent I agree, but our main duty is to our client - the Landlord.

But this is precisely what pis*es me off as a tenent about having to pay upfront fees to an agent. The landlord is the client, he pays the fees for the agent to do what needs to be done to rent out the property. If I'm paying a fee of £200 to the agent to be able to move into the flat, on top of the rent and deposit which is what I'm actually paying to be in the flat, then as far as I'm concerned, that make me a client as much as the LL is. But that's not the case, the agent still treats you like an utter piece of crap.

I agree with the post above, when the property market crashes, agents and LLs will get exactly what's coming to them, because the real "clients", the people they need to make a living will be very joyfully telling them to stick it. In what other business is the customer treated with such complete contempt and disregard? It's just not sustainable and I very much look forward to agents and LLs finding that out the hard way.

weegie.geek

cheltenhamgirl wrote: »

weegie.geek wrote: »

The letting agency should be fighting for the rights of whichever party has been wronged, and recouping the costs of this from the perpetrator.
quote]

To a certain extent I agree, but our main duty is to our client - the Landlord. We can't just 'steal' money from the landlord, just because we don't agree with how he's running his property. Just like you can't walk into a shop and take things just because they've done something that you don't believe is right. It just doesn't work that way. A reputable agent will never be happy about damp etc in properties, but sometime's there just isn't a lot you can do about it.

xx

I'm not sure shoplifting because the shop's "done something that you don't believe is right" and withholding rent because the landlord is endangering the tenant's health are exactly analogous...

If I was in a property with damp or some other serious problem like that, and neither the agency or the landlord would or could do anything about it, I'd take action against both parties.

Fergie73

Just like you can't walk into a shop and take things just because they've done something that you don't believe is right.

I agree with the above - that analogy misses the point completely. If you buy something from a shop, and it's faulty or not fit for purpose, you take it back and the shop has to - by law - give you your money back. Why on earth should renting a flat be any different? If it's not fit for purpose, the vendor has no right to be taking money for it.

It goes back to this idea that LLs and agents have forgotten that renters are customers - both parties need tenents; without them you have no business. Taking money for nothing, and ripping people off will inevitably lead to those customers demanding better, and if the private sector can't provide that, then the demand will be for the government to step back in and do it.

Already this is happening. There were over 1000 applicants for one council house recently where I live. That's a lot of people who are desperately trying to opt out of the private rental market and the council is clearly aware of that, and of the fact that all of these people are voters. LLs and agents are shooting themselves in the foot but seem to be so brain dead on the morphine of the property bubble that they can't see this.