Jump to content

Letting Agents Fees to Be Banned. Thoughts?

Recommended Posts

Aye, very populist and headline-grabbing but also very misguided as to long-term effects.

 

Typical government, right?

 

Could be, they often get things badly wrong, but in this case I think the effect might be largely as they expect, particularly given that it worked as expected in Scotland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No they aren't. If the landlord is now faced with a £500 bill for something they can do themselves then they will move their business elsewhere to a cheaper agent or they will do it themselves. I think it's you who is missing basic business rules here. This ruling forces agents to be more competitive in their fees to landlords in a way they never had to be with tenants.

 

No, they won't. If the Landlord is faced with a £500 bill for something they could do themselves, but used to be paid by the Tenant, then they'll do what they can to make the Tenant still pay. Yes, they may move to a cheaper Agent, but they'll still do what they can to make the Tenant pay. The Tenant always pays.

 

What is your proposal to deal with it? I despise agents. They rip you off as both a tenant and landlord and I've been both. I'd be up for any better solution but I don't see one.

 

My proposal is to raise the rent if the larger type of fee is transferred to me. If the Agent is able to swallow the cost then I will do nothing specifically to address this. If the Agent increases my Tenant Find fee by only, say, £30 per applicant (and assuming there's no more than 2 applicants), then I'll likely swallow it too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically you're predicting that landlords will be both lazy and vindictive, and fail to understand market economics.

I'm predicting that they'll move to a cheaper agent, which will mean all agents drop their prices. Market economics in action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit emotional, and unnecessary. Where's the vindictiveness? Are you happy when someone comes along and lifts money out of your pockets (or bank account)? Obviously you're not. It is OK to not be happy about that.

 

Anyway, it's far down the line now, so I'm happy to line-up my ducks over time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the Accommodation Agencies Act 1953 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...2/23/section/1

and the Cost of Leases Act 1958 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...7/52/section/1

Thanks for including this Jeffrey. I thought there was some legislation to prevent ripping off tenants by Agents. our old agent(when we were tenants) never charged us not even when we asked them to make an offer to the Landlord to buy the property. If this act has not been repealed why is is not enforced. Perhaps because naive prospective tenants do not know about it and the Conning conservatives do not like to have their friends prosecuted, now they have snuck in a modification by the back door. Loath the lot of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/house-prices/revealed-extent-buy-to-let-market-collapse/

 

I paricularly liked this bit : "The research also found that the number of new tenants looking for homes was down 5.2pc, pushing down average rents. "

 

Whats interesting is that the Telegraph presents this as a shock. The market reacts to measures implemented by the treasury to effectively kill off btl and people are shocked?

 

Some people refuse to smell the coffee. Too much self interest to think clearly I imagine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just over 5% reduction. Hardly a collapse.Typical News Hype.

 

Whatever happened to people saving up for things, including house deposits.

Oh yea, Credit cards.

 

I wonder why we are in this mess.

 

---------- Post added 09-12-2016 at 14:47 ----------

 

srt2016f Just wondering why your post was deleted?

 

I get notifications on stuff I am interested in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bit emotional, and unnecessary. Where's the vindictiveness? Are you happy when someone comes along and lifts money out of your pockets (or bank account)? Obviously you're not. It is OK to not be happy about that.

 

Anyway, it's far down the line now, so I'm happy to line-up my ducks over time.

 

This sounds vindictive.

 

Yes, they may move to a cheaper Agent, but they'll still do what they can to make the Tenant pay. The Tenant always pays.

You'd rather make the tenant pay than shift to a cheaper agent.

 

---------- Post added 09-12-2016 at 19:05 ----------

 

http://http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/house-prices/revealed-extent-buy-to-let-market-collapse/

 

I paricularly liked this bit : "The research also found that the number of new tenants looking for homes was down 5.2pc, pushing down average rents. "

 

Whats interesting is that the Telegraph presents this as a shock. The market reacts to measures implemented by the treasury to effectively kill off btl and people are shocked?

 

Some people refuse to smell the coffee. Too much self interest to think clearly I imagine.

 

I don't quite follow. The government acts to 'kill off' btl if you like and somehow this causes TENANTS to stop looking for somewhere to live?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the Accommodation Agencies Act 1953 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...2/23/section/1

and the Cost of Leases Act 1958 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...7/52/section/1

Thanks for including this Jeffrey. I thought there was some legislation to prevent ripping off tenants by Agents. our old agent(when we were tenants) never charged us not even when we asked them to make an offer to the Landlord to buy the property. If this act has not been repealed why is is not enforced. Perhaps because naive prospective tenants do not know about it and the Conning conservatives do not like to have their friends prosecuted, now they have snuck in a modification by the back door. Loath the lot of them.

Yes- and the point is that unenforced legislation is pointless.

Rather than just a criminal offence enforceable - if at all- only by Local Housing Authorities, maybe the promised new legislation should allow:

a. T (or unsuccessful T) to claim damages as well as money back; and

b. that a L who's found liable will lose his/her licence to let.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes- and the point is that unenforced legislation is pointless.

Rather than just a criminal offence enforceable - if at all- only by Local Housing Authorities, maybe the promised new legislation should allow:

a. T (or unsuccessful T) to claim damages as well as money back; and

b. that a L who's found liable will lose his/her licence to let.

 

Surely the point is that there are a lack of complaints, through ignorance of the law.

I would like to think that action could be taken on the lines you advocate but the reality is tenants would have to pay for the privilage of getting justice and would not, in most cases, have the means to do so.

The answer is not in more legislation that would saddle tenants with responsibility for redress but in publicising the law and ensuring education in rights and responsibilities as citizens. The Tories will certainly not improve matters for tenants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • 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.