Landlord doesn't wants to provide a proof of Solicitors fees for contract renewal

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

    Landlord doesn't wants to provide a proof of Solicitors fees for contract renewal

    I am about to renew my tenancy agreement as we are coming to end of the present tenancy agreement. The aggreemnt prepeared by Landlords solicitor and he wants us to pay the accociated costs which we are happy (Since Landlord not accepting to go through our solicitor) now the point is Landlord is not willing to provide any proof of Solicitors fee and he simply want us pay specific amount to landlords bank account. In return he doesn't wants to give or show the Solicitor bill nor the agreement have the details of who prepared the aggreemnt. We are little reluctant and confused on the point whether the agreement is really prepared by a solicitor or it was prepared by a landlord wants to make money out of this.

    any advice on this highly appreciable

    #2
    The landlord is only able to charge fees that you have agreed, or that were notified to you when you signed the first agreement.
    They may not agree with that, but that's the legal position.

    Why not let the tenancy become periodic and not sign a new agreement?
    When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
    Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

    Comment


      #3
      The solicitor won't have any contract with you, so will not be acting in your interests. As such, this seems to just an up front tenant fee, which will be outlawed when the Tenant Fees Bill becomes law.

      The effect of not using a solicitor is that the landlord has no-one to fall back on if he drafted the agreement wrongly.

      Comment


        #4
        leaseholder64

        Thanks for your reply.

        I too accept that solicitor won't have any contract with me. But my question is Can't solicitor provide receipt in my name? Or in general dose the contract has the details of who prepared the agreement?

        Comment


          #5
          You are making a mountain out of a mole-hill. No sensible landlord will have the tenant prepare a tenancy agreement. If it is you that is insisting on a tenancy agreement (where none is required) it seems sensible that you be asked to pay and if you say no, then you might be told to get lost.

          leaseholder64 is it really the case that this sort of fee will be outlawed. For example if I agree to take a tenant but only with a guaranator agreement why would it be outlawed for me to create that agreement at the tenant's cost with a solicitor (if I am not allowed to charge tenant for this service why would I offer it?). That would not really be a standard up front fee -- it would be an agreement related to a specific expense for a specific thing related to modification of an agreement that is actually happening -- not up front.

          Comment


            #6
            VAT regulations require a solicitor (and indeed everyone else) to send the original VAT invoice to the person to whom the service is supplied, not to the person who pays the bill, if different.

            Whether you pay the fees and if so how much is down to negotiation. However, if you agree to pay, it is entirely reasonable to ask for a copy of the invoice so that you can satisfy yourself that a cost has actually been incurred.

            Comment


              #7
              I'm not actually a landlord. My interest in the forum comes from the long lease side. As such I haven't read the details of the Bill, but I'd be surprised if it didn't cover this sort of case as, otherwise there would be too many loopholes to redefine up front fees to make them match an exception in the legislation and create loopholes. My understanding of the spirit is that such things would be landlord's business expenses.

              If the tenant want to draft their won tenancy agreement, they should pay their own solicitor for that.

              Although not stated explicitly here, I think this is more a case of the difference between a written agreement and a verbal one, and, though there is no absolute legal need for a written one, every landlord really should have one.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by AndrewDod View Post
                is it really the case that this sort of fee will be outlawed. For example if I agree to take a tenant but only with a guaranator agreement why would it be outlawed for me to create that agreement at the tenant's cost with a solicitor (if I am not allowed to charge tenant for this service why would I offer it?). That would not really be a standard up front fee -- it would be an agreement related to a specific expense for a specific thing related to modification of an agreement that is actually happening -- not up front.
                There is a difference between a tenant or guarantor paying the costs incurred by the landlord for a service provided to the landlord, and paying the costs incurred by the tenant or guarantor for a service provided to the tenant or guarantor.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by AndrewDod View Post
                  is it really the case that this sort of fee will be outlawed. For example if I agree to take a tenant but only with a guaranator agreement why would it be outlawed for me to create that agreement at the tenant's cost with a solicitor (if I am not allowed to charge tenant for this service why would I offer it?). That would not really be a standard up front fee -- it would be an agreement related to a specific expense for a specific thing related to modification of an agreement that is actually happening -- not up front.
                  Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post
                  There is a difference between a tenant or guarantor paying the costs incurred by the landlord for a service provided to the landlord, and paying the costs incurred by the tenant or guarantor for a service provided to the tenant or guarantor.
                  Doesn't even matter which way it is. Payment being required by the landlord, or contracting with a third party for the provision of a service being requried by the landlord, in consideration of the grant, renewal, ..., of a tenancy would both be prohibited unless explicitly allowed such as utilities, internet etc. And yes, a payment by a guarantor instead of the tenant is included in the proposed prohibition.
                  I am not a lawyer, nor am I licensed to provide any regulated advice. None of my posts should be treated as legal or financial advice.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by KTC View Post
                    Doesn't even matter which way it is. Payment being required by the landlord, or contracting with a third party for the provision of a service being requried by the landlord, in consideration of the grant, renewal, ..., of a tenancy would both be prohibited unless explicitly allowed such as utilities, internet etc. And yes, a payment by a guarantor instead of the tenant is included in the proposed prohibition.
                    I had in mind the situation where the tenant or guarantor seeks legal advice without any obligation being imposed by the landlord. As a general principle I think that any obligation imposed on a party by a contract to be legally represented has to be void as against public policy. Certainly any provision which prevents a party to a land transaction from employing his own solicitor is void - see Section 48 LPA 1925. I do though wonder what the position will be where a landlord specifies that a guarantor must provide a certificate by a lawyer that he has explained the effect of the guarantee.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      The usual story of politicians not thinking stuff through.

                      Yes "up front fees" are an issue -- they basically allow (usually) agents to (not to put too fine a point on it) steal from prospective tenants -- simultaneously charging many tenants fees where they would have no hope of getting the property based on simple information.

                      However "up front fees" can and do serve a purpose -- both for landlord and tenant. If I was a tenant I would want to know that I had secured a definite tenancy - and that would mean showing my hand by way of hard non-refundable (if I were to pull out) cash. How else could this happen - I cannot think of any other mechanism?

                      A sensible landlord will not sign a tenancy agreement long in advance and tell all other prospects to get lost -- quite simply because there is minimal disadvantage to a tenant who walks away from a signed agreement. So tenants risk getting gazumped and left without a place to stay at the last minute.

                      On the guarantor front I very rarely accept any tenant who needs one -- but this would mean that I never would. As far as I am concerned if I am going to get a guarantor, that is going to be a formal agreement signed in a proper manner in a solicitor's office in person by the guarantor at the cost of the party who is benefiting from it (the tenant by way of being granted a tenancy they would not otherwise be offered). And I would also need to purchase for myself proofs of ability of that guarantor to pay and seek refund of those costs. Not allowed to do so -- well it's a great goodbye then.

                      Comment

                      Latest Activity

                      Collapse

                      Working...
                      X