To think that the ban on letting agents fees are a bloody good thing

[Ohbehave1]

Letting agents get a bite of the cherry from both sides. They get a percentage of the rent AND charge the tenant stupid fees for arranging it all.

It's about time the cost of having a home was made reasonable. I hope this is brought in.

And for those saying it will affect middle class people who have a second home a a nest egg - you are lucky to be able to afford a second home to rent out. So don't complain.

Temporaryname, I know you are right but I also know the landlord and he does think he is doing me a favour too unfortunately. My husband does most the maintenance on it (drain rodding etc ffs not small stuff) and they are blissfully unaware how lucky they are. I can't really write too much your toes would curl if I told you how much I pay in rent too.

Hmm, if the landlord is just as bad then that really is unfortunate. Hopefully something else will come up that you can move to, and then you can tell them both to fuck off!

'm a headhunter and we don't charge candidates for our service, we charge the clients. Not sure why it's different for estate agents

Quite. In fact it's not permitted for a recruitment agent to charge the worker except in very limited circumstances.

But auctioneers take a cut from both buyer and seller.

I think these fees do need to be controlled. The same applies to the transfer and contingency fees payable when retirement properties change hands.

I am a landlord of 4 properties and I manage another 16 for other people, one commercial and the rest residential. I'm not a letting agent, I do it by myself from my desk at home.

I think letting agents fees to tenants are outrageous. I do reserve the right in my leases to charge tenants fees for renewals, but I never do. My cost for a lease renewal is a proportion of the £70 a year I pay for an online document signing service (probably a few pounds per lease) and half an hour of my time. Lettings involve some viewings and negotiation, but that should be charged by the letting fee. If the letting agent charges the landlord a percentage of the monthly rent for a management and letting service, then that fee should cover management and letting! I get pissed off at the costs that are being gradually lumped on landlords - deposit registration being the first, and now some councils are requiring landlords to register as approved landlords at extremely high costs. But I still feel these should be borne by the landlord, it's really hard for renters to get together the amount of money they need for a deposit and all the fees, and I would rather have a tenant start off financially stable if I am to have a long term relationship with them where they pay their rent regularly and on time! And referencing fees where the tenant has no guarantee that they will get the property and don't get the fees back are a total rip off!

my sw reported him/them to EH without my knowledge, they are that bad

Also as a landlord I have never yet had a good experience with a letting agency.

First one had my property on the market for a while, finally found a nice couple. Took ages with the paperwork and got the new office junior to do it all and he kept getting it all wrong. I told them I didn't blame him but them for giving him this job with such litter supervision. Then my tenants told me they had actually called about the property a month before but had been told it was gone, at that point it was at a higher price. I lost it with the letting agent.

Second time used a smaller agency, she kept telling me I needed a new kitchen, new carpets, new paint job but the house was fine. I was living there a year before and the kitchen was less than 10 years old. Yes there were some marks on the cream walls but I was happy for the new tenants to paint the house if they wished.

Finally I decided to advertise it myself on gumtree and chose 2 women that day from the 30 that called me and wanted the property.

back in the day when I was last renting I always dealt directly with the LL, pre 2000 this was

Really hope one of the results of this is that Foxtons goes belly up. That would be a thing of absolute beauty .

I agree that charging fees to tenants, especially if they don't get a home out of it, is out of order. I'm sure it used to be illegal to charge tenants any fees if they didn't end up with a place with the agent?

I'm a landlord and also manage another flat - friends offered me the job at the rate they'd have otherwise paid a high street agent. Managing the place has been fine (various issues and discussions with the freeholder, so some work and visits beyond just checking money in and remitting most of it each month), but preparing it for rental and finding suitable tenants was a lot of underpaid work, as initial prospective tenants kept failing to provide sufficient paperwork and needing chasing. A typical letting agent will set fees so properties and tenants that are hard work are balanced out by ones that seem to be money for old rope.

Back when I was renting myself I found some good agents and a huge number that were terrible - though the latter were usually working for even worse landlords.

Yes for a whole host of reasons. One mentioned today was that it will act as an incentive to keep tenants longer term.

They had an agent called David on BBC News earlier today arguing against this.

He came across as a right greedy git.

Even if they do pass the expense on to landlords who pass it to tenants, I would still rather that. If I can see a property is so many pcm, I can figure out whether I can afford it.

If I go to a lettings agency, I am always afraid that they will just decide to stick on another fee at a whim, or 'remember' something they 'forgot' to declare before. And I will be over a barrel, because I will know I can't keep looking forever and hoping.

Plus there's the worry that when you've been there a year there'll be a 250 quid fee for 'new' contracts.

It's not just the amount - it's the lack of predictability.

It is quite correct that tenants pay for these as they are legal documents that protect both the landlords and the tenants interests.

Not it's not. the tenant is not your client. Charge the fees to your client as they contract your services.

well, for the people who are saying they will just recoup the fees... the market doesn't think so. Foxtons stock lost a whopping 15% of its value today.

SoMuchRoomForActivities

A fee to sign a new lease agreement is just that. The cost is not meant to be comparable to the work required. It's just a fee to help pay for the business overheads.

Its essentially a mail merge, and even the letter is electronic. The agency that I rent through moans if you try and pay in any other way than on the website.

When I first started renting you has a fixed term contract then a rolling contract thereafter, no new contracts needed.

Its just a way to screw people over for money.

Who are these 'Foxtons' of which you speak? I don't think we have them round here.

I do like to renew leases, as I don't like the uncertainty of a tenant being able to give me one month's notice to move out. It's very easy to do though!

There are some truly shit agents out there. I've used one a couple of times. They weren't too bad, but I've had much better success advertising directly online (I use a site called Urban Sales and Lettings which lists properties on all the main search sites) and using my own letting board. You have to deal with enquiries and viewings yourself, but the market is so strong that it is a fairly short process and it means you can suss out tenants yourself and find the ones you want. I am starting to think I should expand a bit, because there must be a gap in the market for a tenant-friendly "ethical" agent!

Chilipepper20, I agree. It just seems so wrong to me that an agent is allowed to take money from both parties! The agent can only have a responsibility to one party, their client, they are the ones who should pay.

All the enormous fees are London and nearby, as is foxtons. Still dodgy agents country wide, but the desperation in London is a shark Paradise.

YANBU - and I have previously worked as a letting agent.

This is great news. Hopefully by changing landlords agents all be more accountable for the work they do.

They do very little for their money. I know of places that the multiple referencing fees for same properties!

I've been opposite a work employer as she's given referencing check for me to an agency. They may as well been phoning a friend.

I do think letting agents inflate rentals and encourage churning. There is no need to do renewals after 6 months. Let it roll on to a 2 mth landlord/1 mth tenant notice period- but no they seek to cream more money.

My landlady had instructed an agent for the legal side of it. There were 23 errors in my tenancy agreement and I refused to sign it. She pointed the errors out. They sacked us. We were too much hard work. That contract in contract wouldn't have stood up. She joined ARLA and did it herself!

This is a screenshot of the Facebook page from the manager of the EA office from which my student daughter rented (and paid exorbitant non-refundable fees that were extracted from her on the day of viewing and followed up some months later by a grossly unfair contract). The owner of the business was one of those who "liked" the page. The contempt is outrageous.

andbabymakesthree As a landlady, I too have had to correct EA contracts (I happen to be a lawyer and only have them draft the contract as I have no option, and what adds the the insult to the injury is that I have to pay the £300 or whatever). Then I find out they charge the tenant too!!! I am so pleased about this law change. Yes, London here.

Who are these 'Foxtons' of which you speak? I don't think we have them round here.

Lucky you- probably the only company I would be happy to see go bankrupt. They are the devil's estate agent.