Letting Agent overlaps tenancy end/start dates

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • nukecad
    replied
    Off topic, sorry Geeba, but it's a multi-purpose word, one short sentence:

    "I suspect that the statement made by the suspect agent is somewhat suspect"

    Leave a comment:


  • jpkeates
    replied
    Originally posted by nukecad View Post
    I think "suspect" isn't quite strong enough of a word.
    That made me laugh.

    I suspect you're right.

    Leave a comment:


  • nukecad
    replied
    Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
    I suspect that the agent is really more focussed on the renewal fee that they can earn from operating this way.
    I think "suspect" isn't quite strong enough of a word.


    Leave a comment:


  • jpkeates
    replied
    Originally posted by Geeba View Post
    In the past when I have discussed this with the agent he has swayed me away from a periodic arrangement so, whenever an existing tenant's current contract is coming to an end and they want to stay on a new fixed term agreement is drawn up (which I get charged for) and which has the overlapping end/start dates that I am questioning, which the agent has also explained to me is done because otherwise you give a day away free to the tenant.
    First of all, overlapping tenancy agreement dates is just stupid, full stop.

    There's no possibility of giving away a day free to the customer, you're actually charging them an extra day per renewal - that's just how maths works, that the agent hasn't realised that makes me doubt their basic intelligence.
    It's not hard to work out, and it's, simultaneously, impossible to see how a tenant could possibly get a free day by using the dates in the more conventional way.

    The agent's justification against a periodic agreement is that it can be ended at any time by either party and that can make the tenant feel unsettled and potentially move on sooner, whereas a fixed term agreement provides the tenant with the comfort of knowing they have the property for the agreed period.
    My experience is that a periodic tenancy is much more settled for a tenant, the way your agent is operating means that every year the tenant has to make a new 12 month commitment, which is an annual decision that a periodic tenancy avoids.
    If you and the tenant are happy with each other, you're not likely to end the agreement unless you have to, and the same with the tenant, as long as they're happy with their home, why would they move.
    And, being practical, you want the tenant to be free to serve notice anytime.
    What are you going to do if the tenant loses their job and can't afford the rent, try and force them to stay to the end of the contract?

    I suspect that the agent is really more focussed on the renewal fee that they can earn from operating this way.

    Don't forget that the agent works for you and if you want the agreements to be dated in a particular way, the agent should be doing what they're told.
    That they're not, tells me that you'd probably be better off without them.

    The tail's wagging the dog (and it seems that the tail is a moron).

    Leave a comment:


  • Geeba
    replied
    In the past when I have discussed this with the agent he has swayed me away from a periodic arrangement so, whenever an existing tenant's current contract is coming to an end and they want to stay on a new fixed term agreement is drawn up (which I get charged for) and which has the overlapping end/start dates that I am questioning, which the agent has also explained to me is done because otherwise you give a day away free to the tenant.

    The agent's justification against a periodic agreement is that it can be ended at any time by either party and that can make the tenant feel unsettled and potentially move on sooner, whereas a fixed term agreement provides the tenant with the comfort of knowing they have the property for the agreed period. Anyway, I realise that this is now muddying the waters somewhat away from the original question.

    BTW, I have been using the agent for a long time and they are quite a major player in their area so just leaving them and finding a replacement, as has been suggested, is an uncomfortable option for me at the moment.

    Leave a comment:


  • jpkeates
    replied
    I'm not sure what benefit there is in having sequential tenancy agreements with an existing tenant, anyway.
    Just let the arrangement become periodic.

    If the letting agent doesn't see the problem with what they're doing, I'd give them notice.
    It's nothing relating to industry practice or knowledge, it's basic common sense they're short of.

    Leave a comment:


  • Geeba
    replied
    Thanks for the replies. Just to be clear, as I mentioned this is not happening when a new tenant moves in as there generally is an interim period to check the property, clean it, etc. I was just giving that scenario as an example of how I see it with regard to how the date overlap can't be justified, and I don't think the agent would actually behave as described in that instance.

    It was more to do with the continuance of an existing tenants contract where the end/start dates overlap because although it is the same tenant on both old and renewed agreements there is still effectively two tenancy agreements on that end/start date, which the agent seems to think is acceptable practice. Anyway, it seems it is not so thanks again for the replies.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lawcruncher
    replied
    You have to wonder what else the agent is making up as he goes along.

    Leave a comment:


  • ram
    replied
    As per post number 2. - and -

    Me, I would ask, do the agents give the new tenant the keys on the 17th ?
    If the answer is yes, then
    1) it is illegal ( from memory ) to accept 2 rents for the same property, which is what your agent is doing, be it only for one day.
    2) If the outgoing tenant leaves the place in a mess, you can be sure the incoming tenant will not be happy that the agent or you has not cleared the place, cleaned the carpets, and put the place in a good state for your new tenant.
    3) if the current tenant decides not to leave, you will have a claim on your hands for supplying alternative accomodation for the new tenant- paid for by you ( new tenant still has to pay rent.)

    If the the agents do not give the new tenant the keys on the 17th ?, then there is a claim for charging the new tenant rent when he cannot enter his legally accuired habitation.

    The agents act for you, are employed by you, you tell them that at least a week must pass in order that the place is cleaned up,
    You TELL them that they will NOT start a new tenancy until the old tenant has vacated and the place has been cleaned.

    If after all above, they refuse, then you sack them immediately, and sit in their office till they give you ALL the new tenannts details ( all )
    Because it's YOU who gets sued, not the agent.

    Leave a comment:


  • theartfullodger
    replied
    Fire agent for stupidity, get competent one ..

    Leave a comment:


  • Geeba
    started a topic Letting Agent overlaps tenancy end/start dates

    Letting Agent overlaps tenancy end/start dates

    Hi,

    This is a general enquiry as to whether this is common practice.

    The letting agent I have used for a long time overlaps AST agreement end/start dates so if, for example, the existing agreement ends on 17th of the month and the tenant is happy to remain then the renewed agreement starts on the same date of the 17th not, as I would expect, the 18th. I have queried this with the agent in the past and the email ping-pong got quite heated as I simply could not get the agent to understand my view, so I let the situation relax to avoid any ongoing ill-feeling between us.

    I realise that we are only talking about a day so I am more concerned about the principle rather than the time period and the agent insists that ending on the 17th and starting the next agreement on the 18th means I would both loose out financially over the long term and have a sort of "dead" gap between agreements (which I do not agree with). Now, if the tenant is simply extending their stay then there is no real disruption or if a tenant moves out, there is generally an interim period before the next tenant moves in so this situation doesn't occur.

    However, using my example dates, my view is that if the current tenant was to leave they would have the right to stay in the property up to midnight of the 17th and therefore if a new tenant were to move in immediately, they would have to have a start date of the 18th not the 17th otherwise you would have two parties wanting use of the property on the same date which to me is nonsense! It seems obvious to me but I can not get the agent to understand this and I wonder if I am missing something.

    I discussed this situation with another letting agent I use and they said it is not something they do nor have they ever heard of it being done, so I feel that this supports my point of view as being correct.

    Has anyone ever heard of or experienced this, or aware of it as typical way of dating agreements by agents?

    Thanks

Latest Activity

Collapse

Working...
X