Agents crying

[PeanutButter]

My sib got this begging email:

 

Quote

 

I am not sure if you are aware or have read our newsletters about this, but this year the government are bringing in a new law which states that letting agents can no longer charge a tenant any fees whatsoever. This is obviously going to make a massive impact on letting agents across the country with a massive loss on income and 3 have already closed in xx  including Martin + Co, Crossmeads and Cubitt & West. Further to our market research, we have found that a lot of agents are putting up their prices and rents to compensate for this.

On average, other agents in the area are increasing their fees by up to 5%. We are only looking to increase our overall management fees by 3.5% but I have spoken to x and as we have been managing your property for a while now, have a good relationship with you and value your custom we are only going to increase yours by 1.5% so minimal impact. What’s happening on tenancy renewals is that the rents are being increased to incorporate the increase and make sure you are still earning more money.

Your tenant’s contract is ending in December and she has confirmed that she wants another 12 month. She is currently paying £x so I would recommend a rent increase to £x. Would you like us to action this?

 

 

Oh no! Poor agents!!

[Dorkins]

"Can we increase the rent and keep that increase for ourselves? Thanks very much, signed A Letting Agent"

[hurlerontheditch]

Quote

the rents are being increased to incorporate the increase and make sure you are still earning more money.

just bang the rents up

[spyguy]

1 hour ago, PeanutButter said:

My sib got this begging email:

 

 

Oh no! Poor agents!!

Good luck with rausing rents.

Voids are brutal at the mo.

[spyguy]

Most likely outcome is any LL who doesnt need to use an agent - most btl loans insist on them - will just do the work themselves.

Im expecting the millions of letting agrnts setip in the last 15 years, to go under.

Just be an interweb server todeal with services.

[PeanutButter]

FWIW My reply was that agents are middlemen scum skimmers and to shop around, but that a good tenant is worth keeping - offer a longer contract for their peace of mind, that way avoiding agents squawking like gulls at a chippy on an annual basis. 

[thewig]

47 minutes ago, hurlerontheditch said:

just bang the rents up

This guy/girl gets it completely 

Edited October 26, 2018 by thewig

[thewig]

I managed to get an amusing response from a scumbag EA this week after I left some feedback on rightmove on a 3bed advertised as a 4bed (it used to be a 4bed) which had seen its asking price cut twice already. 

 

My opening gambit was the standard “no way this sells for anything beginning with a 3 in today’s market, good luck chasing the market down. Also this is clearly a 3 bed not a 4 bed as you have advertised”

 

Late night response the same day came back with “thanks for your “expert” opinion, in my xx years of being a scumbag EA I’ve lost count of the number of people who held off buying only to rue the decision, good luck trying to time the bottom”

 

[happyguy]

1 minute ago, thewig said:

I’ve lost count of the number of people who held off buying only to rue the decision, good luck trying to time the bottom”

he is right there are certainly posters on here who have said exactly that.  I guess in many ways it depends if you are looking for a home or an investment.  

[Lord D'arcy Pew]

2 hours ago, PeanutButter said:

My sib got this begging email:

 

 

Oh no! Poor agents!!

It's a crying shame.

Edited October 26, 2018 by Lord D'arcy Pew

[Lavalas]

Can’t wait for the time when tenants facing a rent increase to pay for the EAs fleet of Minis start to realise that they can just move without paying any fees. F*cking arseholes.

[ebull]

42 minutes ago, spyguy said:

Good luck with rausing rents.

Voids are brutal at the mo.

+1

But unfortunately a void costs an agent nowt. Unless they've changed recently they usually even had a clause in management and re-let agreements that the management charge is still payable when empty.

How stupid are LLs that they will go for that? Oh.

Poor [innocent] tenant. Poor [dumb] LL.

[Dorkins]

51 minutes ago, thewig said:

Late night response the same day came back with “thanks for your “expert” opinion, in my xx years of being a scumbag EA I’ve lost count of the number of people who held off buying only to rue the decision, good luck trying to time the bottom”

I love it when "property professionals" play the 'you're not an expert, what would you know about the property market?' card. Once upon a time the way you became an estate agent was to fail all your GCSEs and get dragged down to the EA office by your angry mum.

[ebull]

Just now, thewig said:

I managed to get an amusing response from a scumbag EA this week after I left some feedback on rightmove on a 3bed advertised as a 4bed (it used to be a 4bed) which had seen its asking price cut twice already. 

 

My opening gambit was the standard “no way this sells for anything beginning with a 3 in today’s market, good luck chasing the market down. Also this is clearly a 3 bed not a 4 bed as you have advertised”

 

Late night response the same day came back with “thanks for your “expert” opinion, in my xx years of being a scumbag EA I’ve lost count of the number of people who held off buying only to rue the decision, good luck trying to time the bottom”

 

Please reply.

"Thanks for confirming the area your office handles is undergoing a crash and we are talking about timing the bottom."

 

[Si1]

2 hours ago, thewig said:

 

Late night response the same day came back with “thanks for your “expert” opinion, in my xx years of being a scumbag EA I’ve lost count of the number of people who held off buying only to rue the decision, good luck trying to time the bottom”

 

 

his experience probably only covers the 2007 crash and bailout, so his limited experience would support his view, sadly

[Lavalas]

2 hours ago, ebull said:

+1

But unfortunately a void costs an agent nowt. Unless they've changed recently they usually even had a clause in management and re-let agreements that the management charge is still payable when empty.

How stupid are LLs that they will go for that? Oh.

Poor [innocent] tenant. Poor [dumb] LL.

This is the kind of thing that a fees ban should hopefully create a market for. Landlords are bullish about the fact that rents will go up when fees are banned because the end user always pays blah blah. Yet they’ll quickly find that it’s their costs taking a hit until they start paying attention to all the scams and agent has in place. Competition where there is currently none.

[spyguy]

5 hours ago, ebull said:

+1

But unfortunately a void costs an agent nowt. Unless they've changed recently they usually even had a clause in management and re-let agreements that the management charge is still payable when empty.

How stupid are LLs that they will go for that? Oh.

Poor [innocent] tenant. Poor [dumb] LL.

No and yes.

After a few empty months most LLs will be looking for a new agent.

[AdamoMucci]

7 hours ago, PeanutButter said:

FWIW My reply was that agents are middlemen scum skimmers and to shop around, but that a good tenant is worth keeping - offer a longer contract for their peace of mind, that way avoiding agents squawking like gulls at a chippy on an annual basis. 

 

The guy at poverty118  advertises that lettingsupermarket.com which is 4/5% full management. Your sibling could give them a try. Its still an agent but if your sibling needs an agent then might as well try out an onliner that is much cheaper. Reviews seem fine. If I was a LL that needed an agent I think I would much rather try one of these new guys that some high street scumbag that has been taking the p for years.

Also, they are using a sales tactic in that e-mail. "Some are raising prices 5%, we are only raising prices 3.5%, but for YOU we will do the SPECIAL PRICE of JUST 1.5%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

I bet everyone is getting 1.5%. That is the price rise they are looking for. So what is that going to take it to, 11-12% + VAT?

What happened to just banging up the rent to compensate?

And let me get this straight, the rent is going to go up, just the LL is going to end up with less than before?

People need to start supporting the online guys. Sure it is still a scummy agent but at least they have innovated and the cost is more reasonable and reflects the (lack of) work involved. Once a place is let most of the work is done, and yet that is when these scumbags start charging through the nose every month. 6 monthly inspections and takes a call from the tenant every now and then and then calls a plumber every now and then. 12% of the rent? Ridiculous.

Edited October 26, 2018 by AdamoMucci

[Dyson Fury]

29 minutes ago, AdamoMucci said:

The guy at poverty118  advertises that lettingsupermarket.com

There's a very clear reason for that:

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08140303/officers

[nightowl]

Surely the creeping introduction of fees over recent years meant the agent could tolerate a lower rent being charged and thus lower cut for them without taking a hit, while appearing to undercut rival letting agencies.

From the tennant's point of view over the course of a year this makes no real difference overall.  Pay upfront fees and lower rent or pay no fees and a higher rent amounts to a similar result....in fact the latter is easier I imagine.

The landlords should feel more aggrieved with these fees as the agent hasn't acted primarily in their best interests, but not that I'm loosing any sleep over them!

[spyguy]

12 minutes ago, nightowl said:

Surely the creeping introduction of fees over recent years meant the agent could tolerate a lower rent being charged and thus lower cut for them without taking a hit, while appearing to undercut rival letting agencies.

From the tennant's point of view over the course of a year this makes no real difference overall.  Pay upfront fees and lower rent or pay no fees and a higher rent amounts to a similar result....in fact the latter is easier I imagine.

The landlords should feel more aggrieved with these fees as the agent hasn't acted primarily in their best interests, but not that I'm loosing any sleep over them!

Nope.

Rents are set by wages, competition, etc.

Fees are set by making stuff up.

[AdamoMucci]

24 minutes ago, Dyson Fury said:

There's a very clear reason for that:

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08140303/officers

Yes I know that. He has been very open about it on his site. I do not see what your point is. They are still way cheaper. So the only question is, can they get the job done? Not a huge number of reviews but no serious red flags so far. If I was a LL I would take the risk and try them. Youll never know for sure until you try them. Or you could stay safe and accept increasing commission rates from some high street guy.

I guess it is a personality thing. I like to take these sorts of calculated risks if there is an obvious benefit. And to me there really is not much risk anyway. If they are OK it is huge reduction in fees and you get to stick a finger up at the highstreet agents that have had it far too good for far too long. If they are crap, you leave them. They are not going to burn the property down. How much worse can they be than your typical high street agent? Lettings is not that difficult ffs! A lot of people do it themselves!

[mrtickle]

11 hours ago, PeanutButter said:

My sib got this begging email:

 

 

Your tenant’s contract is ending in December and she has confirmed that she wants another 12 month. She is currently paying £x so I would recommend a rent increase to £x. Would you like us to action this?

A lie. 

The tenant's contract is NOT "ending in December". 

It is automatically changing over to a rolling contract, and NOTHING, NOTHING at all needs to be done in December.

The agent wants to con your sib into paying them, to draw up a new one.

The agent wants to con the tenant into paying, for a new one.

 

[mrtickle]

2 hours ago, nightowl said:

From the tennant's point of view over the course of a year this makes no real difference overall.  Pay upfront fees and lower rent

or

pay no fees and a higher rent 

 

But as we know, that is a completely false dichotomy.

Those are NOT the only two choices. You forgot the one that's actually going to happen: "Pay no fees, and the same (or lower) rent".

The landlords and agents don't realise yet - but that's the way it's going to be.

Edited October 26, 2018 by mrtickle

[Dorkins]

9 hours ago, mrtickle said:

A lie. 

The tenant's contract is NOT "ending in December". 

It is automatically changing over to a rolling contract, and NOTHING, NOTHING at all needs to be done in December.

The agent wants to con your sib into paying them, to draw up a new one.

The agent wants to con the tenant into paying, for a new one.

 

True. Letting agents have probably made billions of pounds out of the fact that many tenants are confused about their automatic right to move onto a rolling contract at the end of the fixed period if the landlord doesn't give notice.