Who's a Letting Agent on this Forum?

[Xtacy4U]

Hi all,

Just a quick question, who's a Letting Agent on this forum?

[mind the gap]

Hi all,

Just a quick question, who's a Letting Agent on this forum?

Tricky one. There are quite a few, but they tend not to admit to it in public

Why do you ask?

[Xtacy4U]

Is there a reason as to why they cannot admit that they're a Letting Agent?

As for the question, I am just genuinely interested.

[mind the gap]

Is there a reason as to why they cannot admit that they're a Letting Agent?

As for the question, I am just genuinely interested.

I was joking, really. However if I were one, I don't think I'd be broadcasting it. Cast your eye down the list of thread titles on the Letting Agents Questions forum and you will see why, perhaps:

http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums...splay.php?f=10

[Xtacy4U]

I was joking, really. However if I were one, I don't think I'd be broadcasting it. Cast your eye down the list of thread titles on the Letting Agents Questions forum and you will see why, perhaps:

http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums...splay.php?f=10

Thanks mate.

[Ericthelobster]

I was joking, really. However if I were one, I don't think I'd be broadcasting it.

Oh I just love 'em.

Had occasion to phone one this morning to chase up a reference I'd asked for last week on an applicant for a tenancy, and which had been ignored. Was advised that it would cost me £25 to have them process it, which, since I don't even charge my applicants for vetting them, I found particularly obnoxious.

[johnboy]

I agree we would give them for free as well. Except when we are asked to fax them to premium rate numbers (0870) to which i refuse to do. It funny how they can come up with a normal number then.

I would point out this is to ref companies not landlords.

[Poppy35]

Im one and proud of it! (dont keel over in shock now!!).

Being doing my job for a long time now, relish the challanges (good and bad), its a steep learning curve.

Not all LA are crap , the same as not all solicitors, estate agents, teachers are bad....

I too dont charge for writing a reference!

[veryartysteve]

It seems to me that LA can become easy scapegoat. The general rules are.

a) Bad tenants are always the fault of LA no matter what the circumstances. If the T looses his job half way through the AST that is also the fault of the LA. A property should be left immaculate, if not that is also the LAs fault. Its also the LAs fault if he does not want to sue (on the LL behalf) the T for a stain on a 15yr old carpet.

b) If there are any faults with the property that are not repaired, its the LA's fault, even when the LA wrote to the LL about them.

c) If anything goes wrong with the property and it is repaired, it the LA's fault, and the the LL feels "ripped off" even if the LA called in a favor to get a superb job at a bargain price.

d) LAs are somehow daemonic for wanting to get paid for the work that they do

e) LLs are always entitled to stop paying the LA even when the contract LL agreed says that the LA is rightfully entitled to being paid.

f) If the LA does not have an intimate and total knowledge of the law, human psychology, macro economics and structural engineering they are in some way mentally deficient

g) The LAs fee is always too high, even when the LA has achieve a rent which more that compensates for their fee.

h) When a LL pays for a "find only" service they are actually entitled to a full management service thrown in for free.

Just to make this thread a little tidier I have put in some advanced responses

1) "You are a letting agent?" - wrong! I am not.

2) "You know nothing about property management" - Also wrong! this used to be my full time job

3) "you are a tenant with a grudge against LLs" - Wrong again! I am not a tenant.

At the moment I am a neutral observer on here, I am just speaking the truth as I see it. LAs do get a bad press, and it is mostly unjustified bad press.

[tom999]

At the moment I am a neutral observer on here, I am just speaking the truth as I see it. LAs do get a bad press, and it is mostly unjustified bad press.

Your personal views above are hardly "neutral", as your background is in property management.

[veryartysteve]

Your personal views above are hardly "neutral", as your background is in property management.

You may be confusing "lack of experience" with "neutrality". By your logic arguments could only be decided by people who knew nothing about the subject. I am neutral because I am neither landlord nor tenant, but have seen the world from both sides at some point in the past. Try some other form of attack I am afraid LOL.

[tom999]

I am neutral because I am neither landlord nor tenant,

That does not make you neutral and unbiased.

The fact remains that your views in post #10 are hardly neutral, and are clearly biased towards LA's.

[veryartysteve]

Your views in post #10 are still hardly neutral, and are clearly biased towards LA's.

This may well be in your (and also others) view, but not in fact LOL.

[mind the gap]

It seems to me that LA can become easy scapegoat. The general rules are.

a) Bad tenants are always the fault of LA no matter what the circumstances. If the T looses his job half way through the AST that is also the fault of the LA. A property should be left immaculate, if not that is also the LAs fault. Its also the LAs fault if he does not want to sue (on the LL behalf) the T for a stain on a 15yr old carpet..

Perhaps not, but that is not usually the LL's chief complaint about Ts sourced by LAs. Given that the LA is taking a large sum of money from the LL (i.e. several hundred pounds or more), for a simple introduction, I do not think it would be unreasonable for that sum to be refunded if the T turns out to be a nightmare. It is not unusual for the T to default on rent only, for the LL to discover the LA has not credit-referenced the T or correctly signed up a guarantor when he was being paid to do that.

b) If there are any faults with the property that are not repaired, its the LA's fault, even when the LA wrote to the LL about them..

If the LA did write to the LL for permission to carry out expensive repairs, then clearly the LL should respond. In the case of minor repairs, isn't that what the agent is paid to organise anyway? However, it would appear that some agents do not persist in trying to contact the LL if their first attempt fails. It's sloppy business practice, really.

c) If anything goes wrong with the property and it is repaired, it the LA's fault, and the the LL feels "ripped off" even if the LA called in a favor to get a superb job at a bargain price..

I would be interested to hear of anyone who has experienced this amazing service since the complete opposite usually seems to be the case. LLs are often ripped off unless they organise the repairs themselves as LAs charge commission on organising tradesmen.

d) LAs are somehow daemonic for wanting to get paid for the work that they do.

Not necessarily demonic. This has been debated to death already; perhaps 'unrealistic' or 'greedy' would be better descriptors.

e) LLs are always entitled to stop paying the LA even when the contract LL agreed says that the LA is rightfully entitled to being paid..

The old issue of continuation fees has also been done to death. Fortunately LLs seem to be asserting themselves a bit more when the contracts are drawn up these days, and refusing to stand for it. There is a clear moral argument for not charging the LL when a T renews, but again, it has been done to death already on this forum.

f) If the LA does not have an intimate and total knowledge of the law, human psychology, macro economics and structural engineering they are in some way mentally deficient.

Not mentally, so much as professionally deficient!

g) The LAs fee is always too high, even when the LA has achieve a rent which more that compensates for their fee..

In absolute terms I would probably agree with that bald statement - yes, the LA's fee is often too high relative to what he actually does (which isn't very much, it would appear).

h) When a LL pays for a "find only" service they are actually entitled to a full management service thrown in for free..

I do not think most LLs expect that. In fact the reason they stick with 'find only' is because they don't trust an agent to manage their property.




At the moment I am a neutral observer on here, I am just speaking the truth as I see it. LAs do get a bad press, and it is mostly unjustified bad press.[/QUOTE]

You are clearly not neutral...and your evidence for all your sweeping generalisations is...?

[Xtacy4U]

Letting Agents are boss la'