Brilliant news that Letting Agents fees are going to be banned...

[weresquirrel]

and deposits limited to 1 week instead of 6! Yay, at last someone is giving a damn about poor tenants who have been treated like crap for years, both by the Government and by landlords and letting agents! Hooray! Well done the evil Tories .

Under the standard terms of an AST the notice period tenants need to give is two months

No it isn't!!! Under a fixed term tenancy the tenants can only give notice at the end of the fixed term and they still only have to give one calendar month notice.
You as the landlord always have to give 2 months even at the end of a fixed term. How do you not know this?

Our houses are in an affluent area of manchester and I doubt people who rent are suddenly going to buy up the houses my dh may decide to sell. People who rent generally don't want the commitment or can't get a mortgage. So the houses will actually just go to wealthy-ish people. And leave renters with less choice/higher rents.
I think this talk of rents falling must be London- centric - it's certainly not happening in my neck of the woods.

A lot of the vitriol aimed at landlords comes from jealousy, pure and simple- people think "oh, I can't even get one property, why should you own several"? Never mind that my dh has worked his arse off since he was 18 building up his business and taking many many financial risks. Landlords are running a business just like anyone else. Are they supposed to rent out flats for free, maybe just do it as a hobby? You people have no idea how hard my husband works. You're deluded.

I'm a LL and I'm horrified at the fees tenants pay. I don't use agencies and don't charge any fees. I do think the size of fees and the "any excuse for a charge" attitude is very wrong.

I do think it will increase rents slightly overall but hopefully it will create more competition as the costs of moving are lower so people won't be trapped in unsuitable properties because they can't afford to move. And that will drive up standards.

But the root of the problem is that the government just aren't building enough houses!

The deposit limit will be one months rent - OK. You either get a decent tenant and back it all goes, or you get the place destroyed and six months rent won't cover it, so not really bothered.

The holding deposit is capped but here outside the holy city of London we don't have those so not relevant.

And you pay rent in advance so adding that to the list of charges makes no sense.

The governments do rely on private landlords, that's why there is no sniff of council help until eviction. Not enough houses.

Our houses are in an affluent area of manchester and I doubt people who rent are suddenly going to buy up the houses my dh may decide to sell. People who rent generally don't want the commitment or can't get a mortgage. So the houses will actually just go to wealthy-ish people. And leave renters with less choice/higher rents.

what will they do with the houses?

I do think it will increase rents slightly overall

the most dramatic affect will a drop in the fees the agency charge, because now the fees will be paid by people who have a choice. 100 pounds to photocopy a document? in the old system, a tenant has to decide if it's worth paying that or moving. In the new system, the LL will either go to a better priced EA, or let the place himself.

My properties are north of London. Rents are rising. I haven't raised the rent on my first property as the tenants are amazing and look after the place brilliantly. The tenancy is rolling, with a two month break clause requested by the tenant, not me. God forbid they ever move. Finding a new tenant would cost me 2 weeks' rent, but I don't think my agent fees are particularly high.

I am always slightly at all this talk about how no fees will make it impossible to tenants to find homes and rents will rise and all will be awful.

Those fees have been banned in Scotland for years and the system works perfectly well without them. I don't know if rents are slightly higher to compensate, but if that's the case it works - it's dramatically easier to pay slightly more rent throughout the year that somehow pull thousands of pounds out of the air, sometimes at quite short notice. I've heard the fees friends of mine have had to pay to move house in London and it's frankly mind blowing.

I'm planning on renting my house out rather than selling when we move. I wouldn't even want to go through a lettings agent because I've worked for one and I know how much they rip both parties off and in some situations play them off against each other for their own gain.

There is literally no need for a £90 charge every year for what (like someone said before) literally is a bit of photocopying.

We literally had a stock tenancy agreement, always the same just changed names addresses and amounts etc printed and signed and that was £99+vat thanks plus more on top for credit searches, plus deposit obviously and then holding fees.

It really is disgusting what they're allowed to charge

I have noticed though more and more landlords just advertising their own properties on social media and selling sites, even the shittiest houses ive seen have had interest.

Renting is crazy around here and we're in yorkshire and not in a big city.

I looked for properties to rent similar to mine to see what the rents were like and there was not a single one available in my village. They go immediately apparently, which is good for me but not good if you want to rent.

There is literally no need for a £90 charge every year for what (like someone said before) literally is a bit of photocopying.

of course there is no need. they do it because they can. Any business in its right mind would charge whatever fee they could if they could get paid for it. In this case, the trouble is the tenant has no choice. The tenant can't just say, that's too much so I will use the services of a lower priced EA, because they aren't picking the service provider.

I was a LL for a few years (years ago) while we were working away. I was appalled at the number of fees we had to pay which I knew as a tenant we had also been charged for! The agents were charging us (fine) and also the tenants for the same things.

A well managed deposit is one thing. Making tenants pay fees for agreements and renewals is ludicrous.

So glad to see this happen. I've been following the campaign led by the doughty Baroness Grinder over the past few years.

I just don't think a £90 fee should be where an agent makes there profit!

£20 fine. Covers the cost of typing it up, ink, paper, time. But £90?! And every year.

I hated that job

MissWiggy I think it's you who is deluded. How come people like you resort to calling posters "jealous". You have absolutely no idea about the lives of those you are talking to. You can be a house owner and indeed pretty well off and still have empathy and compassion for those who rent and do support the changes announced today.

A lot of the vitriol aimed at landlords comes from jealousy, pure and simple- people think "oh, I can't even get one property, why should you own several"?

Ahhh that old myth. I wondered how long it's as before that got trotted out. It is quite possible to disapprove of something or consider a situation fundamentally unfair without jealousy coming into it. I own my flat and I still think a significant minority of small scale landlords are cowboys and that the majority of letting agents are incompetent money grubbers who are fractions away from being outright conmen.

What is the rental market like atm in central London?

I'm told rents are falling, and there is a lot of inventory - a renter's market.

If that is true, by (roughly) what percentage, would you estimate rents have fallen?

I've been told in the region of 10%, and wonder if that is accurate.

If you hire a car or van you have to provide lots of identification, pay deposit and pay for any damages. The fee includes insurance. Let's assume a van replacement would cost 30k. So if you rent a property you would expect to pay some upfront fees. Let's assume to buy the house would cost 300k.The point I'm trying to make is that whether you are letting via letting agents or privately there is some risk involved

Poosny a periodic tenancy continues on the same terms and conditions of the previous fixed term tenancy agreement, so if the tenancy agreement states the tenant must give 2 month's notice to vacate them it will continue on a rolling contract.

AdalindSchade you can specify that the tenants give 2 month's notice to vacate on a fixed term tenancy agreement. It just has to be agreed and signed by the tenant. You can customise the agreement in lots of ways.

Dewey - I agree that this is the case generally but understood that it did not apply to notice periods?

I thought for a statutory periodic tenancy (which begins when an AST expires) a landlord must give 2 months notice but a tenant can give 1 month notice - but tied to rental payment dates so it could be slightly longer than one month. This is also the advice of letting agents but perhaps they have an alternative agenda (e.g. extra fees for new lease).

I hope you are correct and the original notice continues to apply to both parties - if so I would be more than happy to use rolling tenancies when an AST expires if tenants wish.

Could you let me know where this rule is found?

Adalind - that was badly phrased by me.

Under the terms of the AST we use, after the break point (usually requested by tenants) both parties need to give two months notice to end the AST before or at the end of the fixed term. I am well aware that the landlord needs to give the required notice before the end of the fixed term in any event.

It is the need to preserve the two month notice by the tenants that means I try to avoid a statutory periodic tenancy arising, but a previous poster mentioned that the original notice periods may continue which would be helpful.

The tenancy is rolling, with a two month break clause requested by the tenant

There is no break clause in a rolling tenancy.

Also - poosnu and dewey you can put a clause like that in your tenancy agreement but it doesn't make it enforceable. Your tenants could still give you one month notice and leave the property (assuming out of fixed term period) and you wouldn't be able to pursue them for the second month rent because tenancy law overrides tenancy agreements.

A two month notice period is indeed enforceable during the fixed term of the tenancy agreement (as both parties have agreed).

What happens after the fixed term expires may well be different, but that is why landlords may prefer to avoid rolling tenancies and enter a new fixed term tenancy agreement. My point was that this behaviour is not driven by letting agents generating additional fees.

Poosnu - Unless the law has changed in the last couple of years, tenants can walk away with no notice at the end of a fixed term contract. I had this issue as a ll as well as tenants once giving me 2 weeks notice when on a periodic. The agent told me I wouldn't be able to get any money from the tenants as the contract isn't legally binding.

In any case, it is often letting agents, who insist on contract extensions as opposed to going onto periodic. I have to tell the agent I don't want extensions. They charge me for the privilege btw. I was assuming they don't charge the tenants but maybe I'm wrong.

Of course they charge the tenants.
I wish landlords would make themselves aware of what agents charge to tenants.

Poosbu Rolling is only 1 month notice, so as you say there is a difference between an AST with 2 month notice break clauses, and rolling. Mummyoflittledragon is also right in that the risk with the end of AST for a landlord is generally much worse (you have a day when the tennant can leave with 0 days notice)