Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Milton

Estate Agent Telling Porkies?

Recommended Posts

My Brother rents a property. His annual tenancy agreement is coming up for renewal.

His girlfriend moved in with him a while back. The Estate Agent got wind of this.

The Estate agent has now told him that his girlfriend must be named on the tenancy agreement.

We read through the tenancy agreement. There is no mention of this.

Under which law does the girlfriend have to be named on the tenancy agreement?

[it seems to me that the greasy slimeball EA are saying this, so that they can put her name on a new tenancy agrement, and charge him another admin fee of £160 for a new tenancy agreement]

Edited by Dan1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never Mind:

He has been on a 12 month fixed term tenancy agreement.

So will be telling the Estate Agent, that he is happy to let the existing fixed term tenancy agreement rollover into the standard periodic tenancy.

My understanding is that They should not charge him any admin fees for this.

If they want to include his girlfriends name on the standard periodic tenancy thats fine, but he does not expect to have to be charged any admin fees.

As he is the one paying the rent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Estate agent has now told him that his girlfriend must be named on the tenancy agreement.

Under which law does the girlfriend have to be named on the tenancy agreement?

There is no law saying this, and she doesnt have to be on the tenancy agreement, so tell the agent to get stuffed

So will be telling the Estate Agent, that he is happy to let the existing fixed term tenancy agreement rollover into the standard periodic tenancy.

My understanding is that They should not charge him any admin fees for this.

If they want to include his girlfriends name on the standard periodic tenancy thats fine, but he does not expect to have to be charged any admin fees.

There is no periodic tenancy agreement to include her name onto, the current agreement will by default roll onto a periodic, the girlfriend can live there, its as simple as that.

Tell him not to sign any new agreement as it wouldnt surprise me to hear back from you saying "my son signed what he thought was a periodic agreement with his girlfriends name, but it turned out to be a new AST"

Dont sign a thing, dont pay a fee, i "doubt" the landlord will want to turf out a perfectly good rent paying tenant just so another slimy EA can get a fee they did nothing to earn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never Mind:

He has been on a 12 month fixed term tenancy agreement.

So will be telling the Estate Agent, that he is happy to let the existing fixed term tenancy agreement rollover into the standard periodic tenancy.

My understanding is that They should not charge him any admin fees for this.

If they want to include his girlfriends name on the standard periodic tenancy thats fine, but he does not expect to have to be charged any admin fees.

As he is the one paying the rent.

Seems reasonable to accept the girlfriend as the 2nd tenant on the agreement. I too would draw the line at paying any extra fees.

I would guess that it only takes the Admin Assistant in the LA office 5 or 10 minutes to amend the contract, plus maybe a bit extra for stationery. Not exactly £160's worth of work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they put her on the tenancy, then they are likely to go through the referencing and credit checks which will cost money and time. That is why they would want an extra admin fee.

They will want her name on the tenancy agreement to make her just as responsible for the rent and property as the tenant. The original tenancy agreement will probably state that only the agreed tenant can live at the property on a full time basis unless the landlord agrees to allow another person live there.

I know it should not matter who lives there and I am not backing another agent up, but there could be issues with the mortgage company or insurance if people are living at the property that are not on a tenancy agreement.

What happens if he moves out and she decides to stay there without a tenancy agreement etc?

The landlord may not want the tenancy to move on to a periodic tenancy and might request that a new agreement is signed. Even if the tenants are paying on time and looking after the property the landlord may want the security of a new agreement in place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.] If they put her on the tenancy, then they are likely to go through the referencing and credit checks which will cost money and time. That is why they would want an extra admin fee.

2.] They will want her name on the tenancy agreement to make her just as responsible for the rent and property as the tenant.

The original tenancy agreement will probably state that only the agreed tenant can live at the property on a full time basis unless the landlord agrees to allow another person live there.

3.] I know it should not matter who lives there and I am not backing another agent up, but there could be issues with the mortgage company or insurance if people are living at the property that are not on a tenancy agreement.

4.] What happens if he moves out and she decides to stay there without a tenancy agreement etc?

5.] The landlord may not want the tenancy to move on to a periodic tenancy and might request that a new agreement is signed.

Even if the tenants are paying on time and looking after the property the landlord may want the security of a new agreement in place.

The EA turned up at the property and asked her to sign something, so they can do a credit check. My Brother was at work at the time......

They did not mention any cost, or charge. They just said they will call on Saturday........

[The Landlord is out of the country]

1.] Yes. I imagine That is part of why they would be charging him. To credit check her. She is 20 years old. And hey have baby together. She has never held a [paying] job, therefore has absolutely no credit history. [she did charity work for a year] So a credit check seems to me to be a complete waste of time and money.

[Credit checks are a jobs for the boys scam. I know someone who has had a perfect credit rating her entire life, and was rejected....]

2.] The tenancy agreement states anyone over 18 has to be named. Thats all it states. Fine. Name her. Write her name on the tenancy agreement. Why should that cost £160?

3.] Insurance? No. if someone is living there they do not have to be named for home insurance purposes.

Why is it that you dont know that if you are an EA, and I do, and I am not?

4.] irrelevant

5.] Maybe this, and might be that, is hot air. They have not told him that the landlord wants the 'security of a new agreement in place'

He has already paid a ridiculously overinflated admin fee upon moving in.

I have read on Landlords Forums, that Estate Agents charge the landlord as well as the tenant, for having the tenant sign a new contract.

Edited by Dan1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The EA turned up at the property and asked her to sign something, so they can do a credit check. My Brother was at work at the time......

They did not mention any cost, or charge. They just said they will call on Saturday........

[The Landlord is out of the country]

1.] Yes. I imagine That is part of why they would be charging him. To credit check her. She is 20 years old. And hey have baby together. She has never held a [paying] job, therefore has absolutely no credit history. [she did charity work for a year] So a credit check seems to me to be a complete waste of time and money.

[Credit checks are a jobs for the boys scam. I know someone who has had a perfect credit rating her entire life, and was rejected....]

2.] The tenancy agreement states anyone over 18 has to be named. Thats all it states. Fine. Name her. Write her name on the tenancy agreement. Why should that cost £160?

3.] Insurance? No. if someone is living there they do not have to be named for home insurance purposes.

Why is it that you dont know that if you are an EA, and I do, and I am not?

4.] irrelevant

5.] Maybe this, and might be that, is hot air. They have not told him that the landlord wants the 'security of a new agreement in place'

He has already paid a ridiculously overinflated admin fee upon moving in.

I have read on Landlords Forums, that Estate Agents charge the landlord as well as the tenant, for having the tenant sign a new contract.

I will try to answer from my POV, but each agent is different and some just do things for money rather than part of a good service.

1. Credit checking and referencing under these circumstances seems like a waste of money, but even if the agent was given the above information, they would not be supplying the landlord the correct service by taking things from word of mouth. What if they did and it turned out that she had a long list of criminal offences for theft or fraud etc. Maybe she owes money everywhere which would result in debt collectors visiting the house and risking bailiffs entering the house etc.

Some people do have an excellent credit rating and are rejected, but it's no scam. Part of the credit checking is to determine income versus outgoings. Maybe your friend was not earning enough money to comfortably cover the rent and all other outgoings!

2. If she is older than 18, then to satisfy the agreement that your brother signed in agreement, her name needs to be on it. The fact that the 12 month period is coming to an end gives the agent a reason to put her name on a new one and set up a new tenancy. 2 birds with one stone. Some agents would try to charge once for her being put on the original tenancy and charge both tenants for a new tenancy at the end of the 12 months. If it is a case of them just writing her name on it, then they will still charge the money and justify it by stating so much is for the referencing and the rest is for time spent dealing with it. They probably charge £60 - £100 an hour for their time.

3. Are you sure? Have you ever had a landlords insurance or buy-to-let mortgage? Some mortgage lenders only grant buy-to-let mortgages under certain circumstances which is usually to do with the tenants living in the property. Some will not allow benefit tenants or students etc. The insurance may be in accordance with the mortgage.

4. Of course it is relevant. It means that there is now a squatter and the agent is responsible for allowing her to live there without being on the tenancy agreement. I'm not suggesting this would happen, but the agent needs to cover their back.

5. I was not stating this as a fact. Just adding that there may be other circumstances and the agent might not be the one to blame. Of course it could just be the agent looking for another bonus. Many of them do this which makes our job harder.

I would like to mention once again that I am not backing this agent or any agent. Mainly because I do not know them and because there are too many rogue agents. I am just trying to explain from my side of the fence being an agent.

Once again some/many agents charge the landlords as well as the tenants for tenancy agreements and renewals for different reasons. Some just to earn more money. This again depends on the situation. If the landlord requests a renewal, then the agent will charge for providing the service. They are also providing a service to the tenant too. Your brother may not want a renewal because it will cost him money, but at least he will know that he will not have a notice served on him to leave the property.

A tenancy is there to give security to both tenant and landlord.

Many tenants and landlords are happy for a tenancy to expire and move to a periodic tenancy. Simply because it will cost both of them to renew. Problem for a landlord is that if it is periodic, then the tenant could give notice at anytime and it will cost the landlord more to find a new tenant than it will to get a tenancy renewal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never Mind:

He has been on a 12 month fixed term tenancy agreement.

So will be telling the Estate Agent, that he is happy to let the existing fixed term tenancy agreement rollover into the standard periodic tenancy.

My understanding is that They should not charge him any admin fees for this.

If they want to include his girlfriends name on the standard periodic tenancy thats fine, but he does not expect to have to be charged any admin fees.

As he is the one paying the rent.

Whilst this may sound great what we have to remember is that it is not upto him if he goes onto a periodic or not. If the landlord doesnt agree then that is all there is to it and I would always bet that the EA are straight in his ear with reasons why a fixed tenancy is safer for him than allowing a periodic. If he doesnt resign and the LL gives notice before the end of the fixed term then he is out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst this may sound great what we have to remember is that it is not upto him if he goes onto a periodic or not. If the landlord doesnt agree then that is all there is to it and I would always bet that the EA are straight in his ear with reasons why a fixed tenancy is safer for him than allowing a periodic. If he doesnt resign and the LL gives notice before the end of the fixed term then he is out.

Are you serious!

the landlord and EA dont ALLOW a periodic, it happens by default.. if they dont want the periodic they have to do two things to get him out

1) issue correct notice (they may have already done this)

2) go to court

They cant just go "you are out guv!" it doesnt work like that and i would suggest you read about how the law works before making such blase statements

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you serious!

the landlord and EA dont ALLOW a periodic, it happens by default.. if they dont want the periodic they have to do two things to get him out

1) issue correct notice (they may have already done this)

2) go to court

They cant just go "you are out guv!" it doesnt work like that and i would suggest you read about how the law works before making such blase statements

If the LL and EA have a brain cell between them then the notice will have been served in advance of the tenancy period ending to ensure that the place can be gained hassle free.

With that in mind, if the tenant refuses to sign a new tenancy agreement then he is out at the end fixed period if the LL will not agree to let the arrangement lapse into a periodic tenancy.

Like I said, I doubt that many tenants will win their LL's over since the EA's will have filled their ears with a million reasons why a tenancy agreement of a fixed term is much better for them.

So it is the LL that agrees to allow a periodic because if he is doing things the sensible way from his perspective then it is all sewn up and the tenant is over a barrel - unless the LL is experienced and doesnt like being fleeced by EA's either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you serious!

the landlord and EA dont ALLOW a periodic, it happens by default..

He understood that.

He was saying that if they don't want it to go periodic they WILL issue notice, even though they don't want the property back.

tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He understood that.

He was saying that if they don't want it to go periodic they WILL issue notice, even though they don't want the property back.

tim

The point i was making is

Issuing notice does NOT end the tenancy, therefore the tenant is not just out, they would still have to go to court to regain possession

I agree its not worth the tenants hassle to remain in many cases, but it is incorrect to say the landlord can prevent the tenancy going periodic when without a court order they cant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point i was making is

Issuing notice does NOT end the tenancy, therefore the tenant is not just out, they would still have to go to court to regain possession

I agree its not worth the tenants hassle to remain in many cases, but it is incorrect to say the landlord can prevent the tenancy going periodic when without a court order they cant.

Am I missing something? How does giving notice not end a tenancy?

If the LL gives notice at the right time then the tenancy ends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I missing something? How does giving notice not end a tenancy?

If the LL gives notice at the right time then the tenancy ends.

No it doesn't. The LL giving notice indicates his desire to end a tenancy, it then takes the tenant to agree or a court to make an eviction notice for the landlord to regain possession.

Edit to add: What Rozza is saying is that from what you have said you think the LL gives notice at the end of the period the LL turns up and executes an unlawful eviction and all is well. I'm pretty sure thats not what you think but only the tenant leaving volantarily or bailiffs acting under a court order can bring the tenancy to an end.

Edited by zebbedee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No it doesn't. The LL giving notice indicates his desire to end a tenancy, it then takes the tenant to agree or a court to make an eviction notice for the landlord to regain possession.

Edit to add: What Rozza is saying is that from what you have said you think the LL gives notice at the end of the period the LL turns up and executes an unlawful eviction and all is well. I'm pretty sure thats not what you think but only the tenant leaving volantarily or bailiffs acting under a court order can bring the tenancy to an end.

maybe I am misunderstanding this.

If my tenancy is due to end on the 1st of december and the agreement states that 2 months notice to quit must be given by myself or the LL then if he gives me notice by 1st october then the full notice period will have occured before the end of the tenancy and that is that. It would not require my agreement.

Ofcourse if I refused to leave it would take a court but they would never side with a tenant in those circumstances.

Similarly if I gave him notice by 1st of october then I could walk out at the end of the fixed tenancy period with or without his agreement.

I must admit though, that given the fixed tenancy expires on 1st december I am still unsure about whether I would have to give notice since if I didnt resign another agreement then it could be assumed that the current tenancy had expired and I could walk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe I am misunderstanding this.

If my tenancy is due to end on the 1st of december and the agreement states that 2 months notice to quit must be given by myself or the LL then if he gives me notice by 1st october then the full notice period will have occured before the end of the tenancy and that is that. It would not require my agreement.

Ofcourse if I refused to leave it would take a court but they would never side with a tenant in those circumstances.

Similarly if I gave him notice by 1st of october then I could walk out at the end of the fixed tenancy period with or without his agreement.

I must admit though, that given the fixed tenancy expires on 1st december I am still unsure about whether I would have to give notice since if I didnt resign another agreement then it could be assumed that the current tenancy had expired and I could walk.

That is not that, you answer yourself in the next statement, that they would never side with the tenant is irrelevent-the notice did not bring the tenancy to an end.

Edit:It may be your understanding of what a tenancy is

tenancy [ˈtɛnənsɪ]

n pl -cies

1. (Law) the temporary possession or holding by a tenant of lands or property owned by another

2. (Law) the period of holding or occupying such property

3. the period of holding office, a position, etc.

4. (Law) property held or occupied by a tenant

It is not the holding with agreement merely the possession of regardless of whether it is a lawful possession or not.

Edited by zebbedee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is not that, you answer yourself in the next statement, that they would never side with the tenant is irrelevent-the notice did not bring the tenancy to an end.

ok, I think I see what you are on about.

What I am saying is that legally the tenancy has ended if notice is served. So if given two months notice the tenancy would legally end at the end of the fixed term tenancy.

What you are saying I think is that that is not the end of it if I choose to remain illegally because the LL can not just come in and throw me out into the street?

That is obvious but it does not change the fact that my right to remain there had expired and a court would boot me out. Remaining there only buys me time but the result is inevitable.

The notice would end the tenancy. If I refuse to comply and remain then I am doing so illegally but the tenancy agreement would no longer be valid and would have expired.

Edited by Number79

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe I am misunderstanding this.

If my tenancy is due to end on the 1st of december and the agreement states that 2 months notice to quit must be given by myself or the LL then if he gives me notice by 1st october then the full notice period will have occured before the end of the tenancy and that is that. It would not require my agreement.

Ofcourse if I refused to leave it would take a court but they would never side with a tenant in those circumstances.

Similarly if I gave him notice by 1st of october then I could walk out at the end of the fixed tenancy period with or without his agreement.

I must admit though, that given the fixed tenancy expires on 1st december I am still unsure about whether I would have to give notice since if I didnt resign another agreement then it could be assumed that the current tenancy had expired and I could walk.

You are misunderstanding a bit

If you tenancy is due to end of 1st december, then on 30th november you can walk without saying a word (officially its the 1st, but hour of day potentially can come into it so for ease sake), you as the tenant need give no notice.

This is regardless of your tenancy agreement, its housing law which overrides your agreement. so if you want to go on the end day, you can just go.

If the landlord wants you to go, he can serve you notice on 1st october, it doesnt require your agreement, nor does it require you to move (regardless of what people think), what it does is give a court the authority to end the tenancy and compell you to move (evict you)

So its simple, there are only two people who can officially end a tenancy

1) The tenant

2) A Judge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, I think I see what you are on about.

What I am saying is that legally the tenancy has ended if notice is served. So if given two months notice the tenancy would legally end at the end of the fixed term tenancy.

What you are saying I think is that that is not the end of it if I choose to remain illegally because the LL can not just come in and throw me out into the street?

That is obvious but it does not change the fact that my right to remain there had expired and a court would boot me out. Remaining there only buys me time but the result is inevitable.

The notice would end the tenancy. If I refuse to comply and leave then I am doing so illegally but the tenancy agreement would no longer be valid and would have expired.

No

You would be living there legally, not illegally

The judge has the power to make you living there illegal, and even then they would give you time to move

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I refuse to comply and remain then I am doing so illegally but the tenancy agreement would no longer be valid and would have expired.

Yep, but you are still a tenant albeit a tenant without an tenancy agreement-the LL hasn't agreed but you are still in possession until you choose to go or a judge makes you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are misunderstanding a bit

If you tenancy is due to end of 1st december, then on 30th november you can walk without saying a word (officially its the 1st, but hour of day potentially can come into it so for ease sake), you as the tenant need give no notice.

This is regardless of your tenancy agreement, its housing law which overrides your agreement. so if you want to go on the end day, you can just go.

If the landlord wants you to go, he can serve you notice on 1st october, it doesnt require your agreement, nor does it require you to move (regardless of what people think), what it does is give a court the authority to end the tenancy and compell you to move (evict you)

So its simple, there are only two people who can officially end a tenancy

1) The tenant

2) A Judge

yes, this is my understanding of it exactly.

What I mean by saying that is an end to it is that legally, or as a person sticking to the rules, I should be out by the 1st of december as that would be the end of the notice period and fixed term tenancy.

Ofcourse I dont mean that the LL can just waltz in and throw me out should I choose to break the rules and remain. That would take a court but the ruling is inevitable.

I see your point though, that technically only the tenant or a court can actually end the tenancy. Although, wouldnt it have already ended? My refusing to leave does not mean that the expired fixed tenancy still exists does it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The notice would bring the tenancy agreement lawfully to an end.

If the tenant does not leave, then court action is required which costs money and time to the landlord. I'm sure the landlord would look to recoup those costs from the tenant after winning the court case.

If the landlord is on the ball, then he can have them out fairly quickly, but either way they will be out.

Each to their own, but I would just go on the notice and find somewhere that I could settle in.

A good point raised above though. If the tenant gives notice, then the landlord is in no position to disagree, so this is a case where tenants have power and are free to give notice without possible court hearings etc. If a landlord serves notice, then everybody is up in arms about it.

This of course depends on the reasons why a landlord would give notice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.