Agents fee justified?

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

    #16
    Originally posted by Grange
    No, OP clearly stated that tenant had found the details on the net first of all. (Personally I probably would see if I could contact the LL directly upon finding a house to let. KNowing agents charge about 4-6 weeks' rent for an introduction, it might be well worth my while.) However...

    I can similarly imagine idly browsing the web and noticing a property to let. Then thinking 'must be a dodgy landlord to be letting it privately'. Then the agent's particulars drop through the door with a nice shiny photograph, clear details etc, at which point I change my mind and go back on the net to find out the details - in the hope of two weeks' free rent. Not so black and white, is it?
    Grange, you can *imagine* as much as you like, the agent cant prove anysuch fairytale and cannot charge a penny.

    BTW - you have some funny ideas about tenants and LL ??!!

    Comment


      #17
      agents fee justified

      I am the LL on this one-the tenant saw the website with my contact nos. on it ,phoned for a viewing which was arranged for 2 days later.When the tenant came to view he said he had received the property details that morning from the agent, but we had arranged viewing 2 days prior to that.We have proof by our phone records.The agent is trying it on.The website is a local one relating only to this small village.By the way Grange, be a little less cynical-or are you an estate agent?

      Comment


        #18
        Well, if the viewing was arranged 48 hours before the leaflet dropped through the door, the agent doesn't have a leg upon which he can stand. That now becomes a very clear-cut case.

        I'm not an agent, but I think that agents get a lot of stick from people who try it on and then blame the agent. Yes, agents appear to charge a lot of money for very little work... but they have offices to run, salaries to pay etc. etc. Many high street professional firms find it quite hard to make it pay - private clients view their fees as exorbitant. £100 per hour? Outrageuos. But if it were that easy, then more people would be in the business.

        There are plenty of examples of house buyers striking a private deal with the seller, in exchange for 50% of the agent's fees. I have no doubt it happens in the letting world as well. Call me cynical? I might call some of the posters on this thread naive.

        Worse than that, Zoe suggests that if the agent cannot PROVE it then a LL wouldn't owe him any money. Au contraire. If the agent's actions had introduced the tenant, then the LL would owe the fee. Has honesty died in this world?
        The contents of this note are neither advice nor a definitive answer. If you plan to rely on this, you should pay somebody for proper advice.

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by Grange
          Worse than that, Zoe suggests that if the agent cannot PROVE it then a LL wouldn't owe him any money. Au contraire. If the agent's actions had introduced the tenant, then the LL would owe the fee. Has honesty died in this world?
          EH !!????

          I have not once said that if the agent did introduce the LL to the tenant that they should not pay. Simply that the agent would have to prove this to win in court and IMO it cannot be proven unless the tenant says it is the case.

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by zoe
            EH !!????

            I have not once said that if the agent did introduce the LL to the tenant that they should not pay. Simply that the agent would have to prove this to win in court and IMO it cannot be proven unless the tenant says it is the case.
            Really? How about:

            Originally posted by zoe
            the agent cant prove anysuch fairytale and cannot charge a penny.
            That 'fairytale' was a possible - if unlikely, but the world is a strange place - scenario where the agent would be owed his money, but probably could not prove so in court. Many other similar scenarios could be thought up.

            Until OP clarified the circumstances, your advice was therefore that if it could not be proved in court the agent should not be paid. Where's the morality in that?



            Imagine being sent by your employer to an empty building to review some archives. You spend five days on this task. On return to the office, your employer says it should only have taken two days, that you were therefore AWOL and that the other three days are chargeable to holiday. How are you going to PROVE this in court - one way or the other?
            The contents of this note are neither advice nor a definitive answer. If you plan to rely on this, you should pay somebody for proper advice.

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by Grange
              Until OP clarified the circumstances, your advice was therefore that if it could not be proved in court the agent should not be paid. Where's the morality in that?
              morality - what are you talking about. The OP clearly stated in his first post that the agent did not introduce this tenant !

              The failry tale was your story about how the tenant might have got a montsh rent free bla bla

              Comment


                #22
                Fairy tales

                Originally posted by zoe
                The OP clearly stated in his first post that the agent did not introduce this tenant !
                Now that's a fairytale, Zoe.

                OP did not make any comment as to whether or not the agent had introduced the tenant. OP asked for advice as to whether a fee was payable given that the agent had not been contacted by the tenant:

                I advertised a rental property on a free website ,and instructed an agent at the same time.I informed the agent in writing that if I found a tenant no fee would be payable to him.A tenant rang me via the website, I showed him the property which he wanted.On the day he saw it through me he received the agents property details via the post but did not contact them.The agent, aware of whom I offered the let to ,is asking for his commission because the agreement I signed with him says"you are liable to pay commission directly or indirectly if a suitable tenant is introduced through us verbally,through property detail sheets etc." This is despite the fact he did not arrange a viwing or speak to the applicant regarding the property-all contact and viewing was through the website and myself direct.Has he a case or is he trying it on.Input from anyone not watching football please.
                If you are selling a house, and the agent puts up his for sale board outside your house and a buyer knocks on your door because he sees the agent's sign, you owe the fee to the agent, despite the agent "not arrange a viwing or speak to the applicant regarding the property". Every single agent points this out in their contract.

                So, to drag this thread back, kicking and screaming, to where it began, look at my first post: if the agent influenced the tenant into contacting the LL, then the fee is due (whether or not it can be proved in court if the tenant chooses to lie); if the agent did not influence the tenant, then no fee is due.


                Finally, if I found a property advertised for rent privately as well as through an agent, I would contact the seller directly to arrange a discount for not using an agent. As a LL, I would be happy to negotiate a discount.
                The contents of this note are neither advice nor a definitive answer. If you plan to rely on this, you should pay somebody for proper advice.

                Comment


                  #23
                  Sorry, Grange but I agree with Zoe in as far as the OP did, quite clearly, clarify that the tenant found the property and contacted the LL BEFORE receiving details from the agent which he recieved the same day as the viewing.

                  I don't know how you're reading this but it seems perfectly clear to me that the Agent has no claim against the LL on this occasion and according to the FACTS as stated by the OP in their first post!

                  I think you're confusing the issue with your cynicism. I agree that it's better to err on the side of caution in this business but I think you've gone too far on this one !! Sorry mate !!

                  Originally posted by Grange
                  Now that's a fairytale, Zoe.

                  OP did not make any comment as to whether or not the agent had introduced the tenant. OP asked for advice as to whether a fee was payable given that the agent had not been contacted by the tenant:



                  If you are selling a house, and the agent puts up his for sale board outside your house and a buyer knocks on your door because he sees the agent's sign, you owe the fee to the agent, despite the agent "not arrange a viwing or speak to the applicant regarding the property". Every single agent points this out in their contract.

                  So, to drag this thread back, kicking and screaming, to where it began, look at my first post: if the agent influenced the tenant into contacting the LL, then the fee is due (whether or not it can be proved in court if the tenant chooses to lie); if the agent did not influence the tenant, then no fee is due.


                  Finally, if I found a property advertised for rent privately as well as through an agent, I would contact the seller directly to arrange a discount for not using an agent. As a LL, I would be happy to negotiate a discount.
                  Any information or opinion given in this post is based only on my personal experience, what I have learned from this, other boards and elsewhere. It is not to be relied on. Definitive advice is only available from a Solicitor or other appropriately qualified person. E&OE

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Grange

                    In the post OP first post he clearly states that the tenant contacted him for a veiwing and had the veiwing BEFORE the agents crap landed in the postbox.

                    "...A tenant rang me via the website, I showed him the property which he wanted.On the day he saw it through me he received the agents property details via the post but did not contact them... "

                    So please tell me what it is you are finding so hard to understand here ? How could the agent possibly have introduced this tenant by sending stuff in the post AFTER the initial contact !!!????!?

                    "Finally, if I found a property advertised for rent privately as well as through an agent, I would contact the seller directly to arrange a discount for not using an agent. As a LL, I would be happy to negotiate a discount."

                    And was it not you earlier in this thread who was talking about HONESTY ??

                    In the OP's case neither the tenant or the LL need to lie about these events, the veiwing was arranged BEFORE the tenant received any information from the agent.

                    Zoe

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Originally posted by Grange
                      If you are selling a house, and the agent puts up his for sale board outside your house and a buyer knocks on your door because he sees the agent's sign, you owe the fee to the agent, despite the agent "not arrange a viwing or speak to the applicant regarding the property". Every single agent points this out in their contract.
                      Never mind the sale board; once when we sold our home a few years ago our estate agent who was a total waste of space, and in the end the buyer was somebody introduced to us by a mutual friend, and hadn't actually been near any estate agents. Of course the agent got their usual whack; wasn't even worth trying to argue the toss with them over it.

                      Comment


                        #26
                        You must have had a Sole Selling Rights contract as opposed to a sole agency contract .. there's a BIG difference !!! In the first, you have to pay agents fee's regardless of wherethe introduction came from whereas in the second, you only have to pay if you get an introduction via another agent, or if your sole agency make the introduction ... !

                        Originally posted by Ericthelobster
                        Never mind the sale board; once when we sold our home a few years ago our estate agent who was a total waste of space, and in the end the buyer was somebody introduced to us by a mutual friend, and hadn't actually been near any estate agents. Of course the agent got their usual whack; wasn't even worth trying to argue the toss with them over it.
                        Any information or opinion given in this post is based only on my personal experience, what I have learned from this, other boards and elsewhere. It is not to be relied on. Definitive advice is only available from a Solicitor or other appropriately qualified person. E&OE

                        Comment

                        Latest Activity

                        Collapse

                        • Reply to Lodgers left without notice
                          by hamilton
                          It sounds to me that you are financially over-extended, if you do not have the money in the bank to cover such eventualities. I suggest you sell up, and readjust your expectation of what life owes you.
                          03-04-2020, 17:24 PM
                        • Lodgers left without notice
                          by hoolaholla
                          I have 2 student lodgers, I am not at the property at the moment and their rent day recently passed and neither paid rent. When I enquired it transpires they have both vacated the property and are refusing to pay any further rent, their tenancy does not officially end until July. I have a 1 month deposit...
                          03-04-2020, 16:52 PM
                        • Reply to Lodgers left without notice
                          by hoolaholla
                          I am confused by your response, are you suggesting that demanding another 4 months rent as per our agreement is the wrong thing to do? Why is it wrong if this was our agreement?
                          EDIT: This was in reply to Hamilton who deleted his reply....
                          03-04-2020, 17:23 PM
                        • Reply to Lodgers left without notice
                          by hoolaholla
                          I was living there, but I have returned to the family home due to coronavirus. The house is now unoccupied, its alright for them to deny their responsibilities but I have a mortgage and without such a luxury. It is so unfair.
                          03-04-2020, 17:12 PM
                        • Reply to COVID-19: Court hearing section 8 vacated
                          by Stew
                          Given that not much can be done court wise re eviction this tenant's issues clearly had nothing to do with Covid could the landlord at least raise a money claims via the online service?

                          Assuming that the tenant does not have a valid concern with you as a landlord and the eviction would...
                          03-04-2020, 17:10 PM
                        • COVID-19: Court hearing section 8 vacated
                          by syrbag
                          A court hearing planned for 23 March for rent arrears vacated, tenant 5 months without paying rent, rent paid 2 months in advance. tenant not picking calls and not taking advantage of the COVID-19 situation. anyone in a similar situation and what is the best way to proceed?


                          'This...
                          03-04-2020, 10:56 AM
                        • Reply to Lodgers left without notice
                          by jpkeates
                          I don't know if you have a legally binding agreement or not.

                          If they signed a contract saying they would stay there for a period, they may be in breach of that contract.
                          However, you would be entitled to compensation for any loss, which seems to be nil, it's very unlikely that the...
                          03-04-2020, 17:09 PM
                        • Reply to Lodgers left without notice
                          by hoolaholla
                          But where do I stand legally? Whatever the current crisis, we still have a legally binding agreement, no?
                          03-04-2020, 17:03 PM
                        • Reply to Tenants not willing to pay once back to normal
                          by tomwarren
                          One other important question: does the tenant have the option to leave in the near future? What if you play hardball, and the tenant gives notice? If the tenant has a renewal date coming up, or a break clause, would it not be easy for them to strike a deal with someone who has an empty property?...
                          03-04-2020, 16:58 PM
                        • Tenants not willing to pay once back to normal
                          by Pearl1
                          Hi All

                          Not sure if this has been covered.
                          We have a tenant who’s happy to pay half the rent until they are back to work full time (currently furloughed)
                          They have then said once normality resumes they won’t be able to pay back the additional rent that was missed previously....
                          03-04-2020, 14:10 PM
                        Working...
                        X