Jump to content

Recommended Posts

We're about to move, and having already paid ?160 for them to get referrences on both of us, we have now spotted this ?94 fee that they've sneaked in.


When we questioned it, they said it was for processing the contract.


Now I'm not being funny, but surely a landlord hires an agent to find them tenants, and they pay a fee for the service. I've never heard of anything like this before, am I just being naive?


What with this, and the broadband trying to charge us to END their (really not great) service, I am just getting so so fed up with being bent over and raped up the ar$e by every thieving company that wants it's pound of flesh, in return for NOTHING as far as I can make out!

We recently rented our office in dulwich keef and paid around ?270 for an admin fee, this was the same with the property before. I agree a total rip off but not sure if there are any agents that don't charge tenants like this.

Depending on the contract, I think they can charge you for the inventory either when you move in or out. Might be worth checking that.


good luck

having recently moved ourselves keef, all I can say is you aren't alone. And from looking around at various places it's not unusual either. The alternative I guess is to luck out with personal contacts or informal places on the property section


We went with an estate agents, but with eyes open and plenty of lube


In a couple of months you will hav forgotten most of this pain and wondered why you waited so long - hang on in there

Guess it's normal then, seems to be newish though, definitely wasn't the case in 2003, when I last rented a place via an estate agent.


Oh well, looks like we're going to have to pay up, but I am going to make it clear what I think and ask them to explain the charge to me, just so they can hear for themselves how full of sh!t they are.


Oh, and sorry for the metaphor used above, just angry at the way things are. It's not a lot of money in the grand scheme of things, but it just makes you want to scream!

I would do my damndest to find out who the landlord is and approach them directly.


The landlord is paying the agent to find them tenants, you're paying the agent too for some reason. So why not just not pay the thieving parasites, and put you money together to get a lawyer to draw up a contract for you.

Keef, even landlords have to be careful with agents; most contracts have a renewal fee charge, which means after the initial tenancy agreement is up, and the tenants and landlord agree to extend it, the agents will charge the landlord another 8-10% of the total annual rental income for doing nothing!...i've always been lucky to rent out privately, but when I've advertised through an agency I've always insisted this charge is omitted before I would sign up, as well as getting them to reduce their 'finders fee'...I think most tenants would benefit from renting privately too, I certainly wouldn't consider charging for checking references, inventory, contract etc, afterall it's usually only a couple of phonecalls; what gets me about the agents charging for references is that in the smallprint they say they aren't culpable if the tenants default on the rent...enjoy your new place!
Estate Agents fees are an absolute rip off for both landlord and tenant. The smaller firms are not so expensive though and they don't have as many charges. Sorry you have been burned like this Keef, you never tried Daisylets one of the sponsers of this forum either Keef?

I totally agree an utter rip off! In Australia you dont get charged any of those bullsh*t charges.. Reference checking people and processing a contract is their job so why on earth would we pay them more to bl00dy well do it! And I have to say over here my experience has been with them that they are lazy and slow so its not even like most of the time you get a good service!!


I have rented my last 3 places privately and intend to do so for as long as I possibly can as I refuse to pay those ba$tards!

Agents should (and I wish by law) charge the very minimum to the tenants. Unfortunately many agents see the tenant as another income generator. The respectable ones don't and only charge what it costs to make credit checks etc. Landlords often list property with more than one agent for letting and tenants should ask what the charges are likely to be before they start looking. Shop around, this exploitation will stop if people do.


I have to take issue with Red Devil. If an agent introduces you to a stream of income why should their fee stop after one year? Makes no sense to me although it is the subject of litigation at the moment, (can I use the F word?) Foxtons are fighting a case at the moment I think and won the last argument but i think the case continues. maybe someone out there knows more than I do (unlikely) about this.

Strawbs Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I totally agree an utter rip off! In Australia

> you dont get charged any of those bullsh*t

> charges.. Reference checking people and processing

> a contract is their job so why on earth would we

> pay them more to bl00dy well do it! And I have to

> say over here my experience has been with them

> that they are lazy and slow so its not even like

> most of the time you get a good service!!

>

> I have rented my last 3 places privately and

> intend to do so for as long as I possibly can as I

> refuse to pay those ba$tards!


Spot on Strawbs. Bloody Poms eh.

EDO, if the agents aren't happy they can always say no to my proposal of no renewal fee, so far this has never happened. All contracts are negotiable. It's the underhand tactics of agents in not drawing attention to these extras that p's the public off, hence Keef's original post. It's hard to negotiate if it's not clear what's on the table. One agent I thought about using made no mention of the renewal fee until I prompted him, and when I asked him where it was written into the contract, I was told I had to check out a referenced website link for general terms and conditions.

Another trick of agents is to include a clause that if the landlord was to subsequently sell the property to the tenants at any time in the future, the landlord would be liable to pay the estate agent a full sales commission e.g 2% of selling price...



EDOldie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Agents should (and I wish by law) charge the very

> minimum to the tenants. Unfortunately many agents

> see the tenant as another income generator. The

> respectable ones don't and only charge what it

> costs to make credit checks etc. Landlords often

> list property with more than one agent for letting

> and tenants should ask what the charges are likely

> to be before they start looking. Shop around, this

> exploitation will stop if people do.

>

> I have to take issue with Red Devil. If an agent

> introduces you to a stream of income why should

> their fee stop after one year? Makes no sense to

> me although it is the subject of litigation at the

> moment, (can I use the F word?) Foxtons are

> fighting a case at the moment I think and won the

> last argument but i think the case continues.

> maybe someone out there knows more than I do

> (unlikely) about this.

red devil Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> EDO, if the agents aren't happy they can always

> say no to my proposal of no renewal fee, so far

> this has never happened. All contracts are

> negotiable. It's the underhand tactics of agents

> in not drawing attention to these extras that p's

> the public off, hence Keef's original post. It's

> hard to negotiate if it's not clear what's on the

> table. One agent I thought about using made no

> mention of the renewal fee until I prompted him,

> and when I asked him where it was written into the

> contract, I was told I had to check out a

> referenced website link for general terms and

> conditions.

> Another trick of agents is to include a clause

> that if the landlord was to subsequently sell the

> property to the tenants at any time in the future,

> the landlord would be liable to pay the estate

> agent a full sales commission e.g 2% of selling

> price...

>

I fully agree that all contracts should be transparent, but the agent has introduced the client to a tenant and, IMHO, should pay for that during the whole length of the tenancy. It's income after all that the landlord would not have had without the agents involvement.


Likewise the sale fee seems perfectly reasonable, although I would say 2% is a bit strong. I think 1% is the norm. Again the agent has introduced a purchaser as well as a tenant and why shouldn't they be paid for that?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • What was he doing on the stage at Glastonbury? Or on the stage at the other concert in Finsbury Park? Grinning like a Cheshire cat whilst pissed and stoned 20 somethings on the promise of free internet sung-- Oh Jeremy Corbyn---  What were his policies for Northern mining towns with no jobs or infrastructure? Free Internet and university places for youngsters. What were his other manifesto pledges? Why all the ambiguity over Brexit?  I didn't like Thatcher, Blair or May or Tony but I respected them as politicians because they stood by what they believed in. I respect all politicians across the board that stick to their principles. Corbyn didn't and its why he got  annihilated at the polls. A socialist, anti imperialist and anti capitalist that said he voted for an imperialist and pro capitalist cabal. He refused to say how he'd vote over and over again until the last knockings. He did so to appease the Islington elite and middle class students he was courting. The same people that were screaming that Brexit was racist. At the same time the EU were holding black and Asian immigrants in refugee camps overseas but not a word on that! Corbyn created and courted a student union protest movement that screamed at and shouted down anyone not on the left . They claimed Starmer and the centre right of labour were tories. He didn't get elected  because he, his movement and policies were unelectable, twice. He turned out not to have the convictions of his politics and died on his own sword.   
    • The purge of hard left members that were part of Corbyn's, Mcdonnel's and Lansmans momentum that purged the party of right wing and centrist members. That's politics. It's what Blair did to win, its what Starmer had to do to win. This country doesn't vote in extreme left or right governments. That's partly why Corbyn lost  We're pretty much a centrist bunch.  It doesn't make it false either. It's an opinion based on the voting patterns, demography and statistics. Can you explain then why former mining constituencies that despise the tories voted for them or abstained rather than vote for Corbyns Labour?  What is the truth then? But he never got elected!!! Why? He should have been binned off there and then. Why he was allowed to hang about is an outrage. I hold him party responsible for the shit show that we've had to endure since. 
    • Depends on what the Barista says doesnt it? There was no physical confrontation with the driver, OP thinks she is being targetted when she isnt. These guys work min wage under strict schedules so give them a break unless they damage your stuff
    • CPR Dave, attendance records are available on Southwark's website. Maggie Browning has attended 100% of meetings. Jon Hartley has attended 65%.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...