Signing multiple agreements to secure insurance premium?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Signing multiple agreements to secure insurance premium?

    Hi all,

    First of all - I have posted about this before, this was during the "is it malicious, is it not" phase. Since then there has been more developments and I wish to share my experience to see what experts/current landlords think. I will avoid posting dates so that I'm not identifiable should my LA see this for whatever reason.

    Signed up for a 12 month tenancy at the start of the month, everything went well despite poor communication from the LA - and we moved in and received a full copy of the agreement with a signature of the LL etc. All above board.

    We had opted for a "smart deposit" which isn't really a deposit; more of an insurance premium for the LL - meaning they can sue us for damages when we move out. Not a great scheme I know. But somewhat irrelevant to the reason I'm making this post.

    The policy for the insurer is that the money is paid to them before the move in date, we had paid on time to the LA but as they didn't pay our money to the insurance company until the following week - the premium was void. So my LA asked if we could sign a new contract with amended dates in order to validate the premium, I was very sceptical about all this so I made the LA agree to several clauses to cover myself. One being that the original agreement would always stand as the original despite signing a new one with amended dates, one saying we wouldn't be held responsible for any extra rent etc. It was all agreed by the LA so I signed the contract.

    Last week, the LA contacted me again saying the premium was voided again because we had tippexed over a wrongly inputted date. So they asked us to sign yet another agreement with more amended dates. I made them agree to the same clauses as before and made sure it all still stands. They sent someone over to sit with me whilst I signed all the agreement again with new amended dates. It's about 3 weeks off the actual move in date now.

    Though i've already signed it, I still feel uneasy about the whole situation. The LA made a mistake and they're just trying to sort it out, apparently both the insurer and LL are on board as well.

    They are a very small LA, with no office but are registered with the property ombudsman.

    I'm worried that all this may effect the validity of my original agreement, bare in mind I have written assurances that nothing will change, I paid my rent in advance and was accepted against the original move in date. There's no dispute to when I actually moved in, because I have all the details in writing.

    What's everyones thoughts on this? Am I safe? I can't be evicted over any of this can I?


    Originally posted by DPT57 View Post
    This sounds like a c$ck up from the Agency and its their problem not yours. You should certainly not entertain colluding with falsifying documents to decieve an insurance company.
    Didn't everyone say words to the effect of this?
    To save them chiming in, JPKeates, Theartfullodger, Boletus, Mindthegap, Macromia, Holy Cow & Ted.E.Bear think the opposite of me on almost every subject.


      Originally posted by JK0 View Post

      Didn't everyone say words to the effect of this?
      Mostly. Though I did receive a lot of advice from other forums/LL's I know personally saying there's nothing malicious about it and it's clear they're just trying to fix mistakes they've made.

      Also, at that point; I didn't know the LL actually was aware and so was the insurance company. I've contacted both directly and they've both clarified they both know about it. I initially presumed the LA was trying to con the insurer, but it was them who actually suggested the new contract signed with a copy of the inventory.

      I have made sure I do not allude to the fact the documents are not fully accurate; and as stated made them agree to several clauses which removes my accountability. I have a long PDF full of evidence compiled in the event something goes wrong.

      Also (and before anyone says it, I know I should've been firm) but I did feel very pressured into signing it. The small-print in contract says the premium or smart deposit or whatever - forms part of the agreement. Makes things even more difficult when my LA lives quite literally round the corner. With the assurances I received from the LA I did feel confident that it would be fine. But as you can probably tell, after the third agreement I'm starting to feel iffy about it all again.


        AFAIK there is no such thing as a 'smart deposit' offering additional benefits to Ts.
        The LL/LA has max x days days from date original deposit was received to protect it in an Approved Ins/Contribution based scheme or suffer the consequence's.


          Originally posted by RezzleDezzle View Post
          What's everyones thoughts on this?
          You were told not to do it, yet you did it anyway. Why bother asking us questions if you're going to ignore people's advise and opinion.

          "Hey, what do ye all think about the consequence of me doing what you warned me not to do?" Seriously?
          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.

          I do not answer questions through private messages which should be posted publicly on the forum.


            Originally posted by mariner View Post
            AFAIK there is no such thing as a 'smart deposit' offering additional benefits to Ts.
            The LL/LA has max x days days from date original deposit was received to protect it in an Approved Ins/Contribution based scheme or suffer the consequence's.
            A "smart deposit" isn't a deposit. It is an insurance policy where the premium is paid by the tenant. As far as I can see it only really insures against the tenant's failure to pay up, and the costs of chasing them, but it does offer tenants a cash flow advantage at the start of the tenancy, even though they end up worse off in the end.

            Since June 1st, it is only legal if a standard deposit is acceptable, as an alternative.

            If the OP hadn't started a new thread, on the same subject, that should have been clear.


            Latest Activity