Jordan Xavier - Company Let advice - housing for young people in need

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Jordan Xavier - Company Let advice - housing for young people in need


    I just wondered if any landlords here have experience of letting their property to a company called "Jordan Xavier"? This has been suggested to me as a possibility for my flat but I've not heard of the company and am wary. Have googled them and they apparently offer "housing for young people in need".

    Apparently it would be a company let with the company but with a named person down on the agreement as occupying.

    Has anyone any experiences good or bad or any comments on this type of arrangement?

    They apparently carry out "weekly inspections" - although I am dubious about this. And I'm told they take responsibilty for internal cosmetic damage that occurs.

    The only attractive thing is that they pay above market rental but I need to consider the negatives as well.

    Any advice/comments most welcome. Many thx in advance.

    Your property would be used for housing the dregs of society, we see this type of question all the time.

    If they say weekly inspections are needed then how do you think they view their prospective tenants?

    Steer clear of it.
    I offer no guarantee that anything I say is correct. wysiwyg


      I have no knowledge of this organisation and the following may be a total mis-representation of their activities.

      Schemes like this result in a considerable number of horror stories on landlordzone. Essentially, these boil down to landlords not understanding what they are letting themselves in for with regard to:

      Maintainence obligations
      - often the landlord has a liability to repair/replace much more than in a regular residential tenancy.
      Condition expectations. Often 'assisted' occupants do not take as much care of a property as a 'regular' tenant might. The agreement may place no obligation on the tenant to return the property in a certain condition - indeed the need for a full re-furb at the end of the contract is not unknown.
      Ending the tenancy. This will not be an assured shorthold tenancy, so make sure you know how you will end the tenancy if the companys aims and yours differ.

      It is not suprising that landlords do not understand, when the majority of such deals are done by means of a tenancy agreement specified by the tenant - just who's favour is that likely to be in?

      My advice would be to get a specialist landlord/tenant solicitor to look over the contact to point out to you the pitfalls of the contract, so you can make an educated decision as to whether you are happy to accept the risk.


        Hi JTA,

        Thank you, that was my fear - it sounded too good to be true.

        Have only had the property on with these letting agents for a week or so and, after a slow response, this is the suggestion they have come up with. I was not overly impressed, albeit tempted by the prospect of a quick rental and higher than average market rent.

        But I fully accept it probably wouldn't be worth it in the long term if there are going to be lots of problems. I agree, a "weekly inspection" does set alarm bells ringing and if you were a "normal", i.e. responsible, respectful tenant you wouldn't entertain someone intruding on you on a weekly basis, so the company must have some cause for concern if it deems it necessary to carry out such regular inspections.

        Also expect the agent may be getting some sort of payment out of the arrangement too but they won't be facing the risk that I would as landlord.

        Thx for the reply.


          @Snorkerz. I think you're being overly reasonable.
          I offer no guarantee that anything I say is correct. wysiwyg


            Many thanks Snorkerz - your reply crossed with mine above.

            Thank you for the helpful comments.

            The letting agent, needless to say, was both vague and singing the praises of the scheme which instantly made me suspicious. I am grateful for the points you have raised and will bear all of these in mind.

            I was lured by the additional rent to be honest but dubious about the rest and the replies so far have confirmed my fears so I think I may steer clear unless I get some very good assurances on all fronts.


              You'll get all sorts of assurances, better to look for written guarantees and run them by our legal bods before you sign anything.
              I offer no guarantee that anything I say is correct. wysiwyg


                Originally posted by jta View Post
                better to look for written guarantees and run them by our legal bods before you sign anything.
                Agreed, words are cheap. Whilst there are many people on here who can provide legal-orientated advice (and good advice at that), with a real paid-for solicitor you get the reassurance that if it all goes belly up due to their bad advice - you can sue!

                I understand JTA's waryness, but we don't know the terms of this specific deal - make sure you do before you commit!

                I have just run a few checks on this company, and although there are no guarantees, they have been in existance for 8 years (so no fly-by-night) and their assets are around 3 x their liabilities - meaning they should have some money if you ever do have problems with them (around £150k in bank).


                  Thank you Snorkerz - not sure how you found that out but I'm impressed!!

                  I will try and find out more about the exact terms and post back here for further advice if I may. Right now the property is empty and is costing me so the prospect of getting someone in quickly and at a good rent is enticing.... but I'll try and use my head before committing to something which may just mean a headache for me in the future...


                  Latest Activity