to wonder what letting agents actually DO?

[ObsidianBlackbirdMcNight]

Moving house - expected to pay upwards of £350 in fees plus extra for a guarantor fee (as I'm on maternity leave and am main earner). Landlords want 6 weeks rent in advance as a deposit which is £1150 in this particular flat we love, which is average rent for 2 beds. Why do they want so much...because so many tenants don't pay the last month rent and landlords lose out. I've pointed out that I have 10 years of rental history and have never even paid rent late once. AIBU to think that letting agents should be able to do references that would weed out people who have done/are likely to do that? It can't be the majority of tenants surely? If not, what exactly are the 'referencing' fees for?

Maybe it's different as i own a flat without a mortgage one it. I can't see what the tenant has to do with the buildings insuarnce TBH. Certainly many of the flats where I have one are let, to DSS and non DSS etc and there are no insurance implications. The insurance is on the whole development.

And certainly the 5 agenices I went to when thinking about letting all wanted 10% for a "references & credit check only" service. To have them collect the rent, do maintenace etc was extra...

The letting agent for our house tried to charge us £350 in admin fees as well.

We refused and eventually settled with them on £200. Which I still think is a rip-off.

I really question the legality of these admin fees to tenants. We didn't hire the letting agent, our landlord did, so why are we paying them to do stuff we never asked them to do?

It's also a conflict of interests because they are representing our landlord while also, apparently, charging us for services too.

"Unfortunatley, the fees are charged as references HAVE to be completed on EVERY property EVERY time. This is laid down by landlords insurance companies, who will not give buildings insurance unless these references have taken place."

This is simply untrue.

We let our house to a private tenant, we didn't provide references, yet our insurer was happy to give us cover anyway. And yes, we have spelled out to the insurer that the house is let.

And even if it was true, why are you charging the tenant for this service when your client is the landlord???

Im afraid it is true with the majority of cases. In my personal experience, if I hadnt had at least 2 references done, I would have been breaking my term of mortgage, and the bank could have ordered me to repay the loan at any time. That was not a risk I was willing to take. Also, if you declare the property is let, again, the insurance company will need details of who is in there, as obviously the policy will depend upon it. If you got insured anyway, then you must just have got lucky, and remember I can only discuss the bigger picture, there will always be an exception.Please dont think Im here fighting the corner for the letting agent, I also think the high fees for tenants are unfair. But, without letting agents it would be harder to let a property, from both perspectives. If you are unhappy with what you are charged as a landlord, go to another agency as fees vary greatly. We charge 75% of first months rent for let only, and fully managed is 10%, so very reasonable compared to what a lot of you are quoting.

But I was asked to pay for references as a landlord, and it seems the tenants are paying as well for the same piece of work.

I also find it odd that the buildings insurance would give a monkeys who was living there. Our excess is a few thousand quid and it's there for if the whole lot falls down...

Contents insurance obviously a different matter.

I also thought with mortgages the issue was whether they would be able to pay the mortgage, if they were letting it's not such a goos sign due to possible periods with no money coming in. Not to do with the buildings insurance at all.

Buildings is obviously anything that doesn't fall out if you turned the house upside down and shook it. Im afraid we have had cases of thick people pouring concrete down drains (!), parking on the drive and bumping the wall, flooding the place etc, so its a huge risk for buildings, as tenants usually dont care for the place as much as owners do.
Contents is not landlords responsibility, I personally have it written into the tenancy that its tenants job, as they are the only ones that can damage things, and contents (unless furnished), is all tenants expect carpets and poss white goods, so therefore in their interests.

Sorry forgot first point, Ive obv been unclear so far, are you seriously telling me what Im reading? If so, your right, its unjust. We only charge tenants for refs, as its for them, not the landlord. You may be charged 'as a package' for references, but there defo should not be a sub charge for this.

Sorry forgot first point, Ive obv been unclear so far, are you seriously telling me what Im reading? If so, your right, its unjust. We only charge tenants for refs, as its for them, not the landlord. You may be charged 'as a package' for references, but there defo should not be a sub charge for this.

Sorry forgot first point, Ive obv been unclear so far, are you seriously telling me what Im reading? If so, your right, its unjust. We only charge tenants for refs, as its for them, not the landlord. You may be charged 'as a package' for references, but there defo should not be a sub charge for this.

Ooops, toddler on laptop alert, sorry!

My letting agent charges me 15% of the monthly rental, but she is worth it, as I have had no problems in the 3 years I've been letting my house out whilst abroad.

I will check next time I have a new tenant that she isn't charging both me and the tenant for a new tenancy agreement.

As to the rental covering the mortgage. mine doesn't - but we are HM Forces, so the mortgage is paid out of salary and the rent gets reinvested into the house, or is used to cover my rent out here.

I have buildings insurance, and they didn't want to know who the tenants were at all.

Our letting agent charged us £36 pounds to change two lightbulbs.

We also had to pay £56 for the inventory company, only to recieve a letter from the letting agents a month or so after we had moved out claiming that the inventory company had undercharged them by £156 so could we fork out for that as well?

I am shocked that mt DH even considered paying it.

Your letting agent wont have charged you for the lightbulb, the contractor will have, and they are just relaying the cost to you. You can ask, (and most LL's do), for a call before any work is carried out so you can authorise it. That eliminates the problem you have encountered.
As for the inventory, too bad on the agent for not being efficient!

For absolute definitely the agencies I spoke to all had bascially the same 3 tiers of service...

1. Reference and credit check only
2. That plus rent collection
3. All that plus maintenance

Tier 1 was about 10% of annual rent so hundreds of pounds. I spoke to about 5 agencies and they all said the same price. I am in London...

Yeah that sounds right. We have the three tiers too.
Intro is 75% 1st months rent then nothing, over to them (which is a bargain!)

• Rent collection is 2.5% of the months rent Fully managed starts at 15%, but I often negotiate down to 10% (which includes the 2.5% RC )

Im in the Cotswolds, so would expect London to be more expensive tbh.

YANBU

Our letting agent takes an extortionate amount, I mean REALLY extortionate amount every month and then just passes on any problems to the actual landlord. I'm not actually sure what they're for, other than taking lots of money.

I have arranged with the landlord to rent directly when her contract with agent runs out, it will be much more financially beneficial for both of us.

Letting agents are a swizz.
Some years ago (ok, 1992), I used a letting agent for my flat when I moved into dp's house. The rent was £350 a month, I actually got £275 (after paying initial fees to register etc).
The first set of tenants were ok (luckily, as they didn't check references).
Then nightmare man moved in, they didn't check references which would have shown he was an unstable schizophrenic who refused medication, they didn't inspect the property which would have shown that he was systematically wrecking it.
He'd been there a year when a neighbour finally found me and told me what was going on. The neighbours had been complaining to the letting agents for months.
When I finally gained access, every electrical socket had been disconnected and removed, every drawer was stuffed with garlic, every window had been wiped with raw garlic, serious vermin infestation, sofa and mattress cushions all slashed, weird writing all over the walls. He was sectioned.
The letting company refused to hand over the security deposit so that I could begin the clear-up.
I sold the flat in 1995 for £37,000. My mortgage on it (bought during 1988 boom) was £52,000. So I owed the Halifax £14,000 and they insisted I paid it in a lump sum or they wouldn't allow the sale).
Now I let out the house I moved into in 1992, but I manage it myself. Have great tenants who I meet with regularly and their rent goes straight into my own bank.

springlamb really enjoyed your use of the word "swizz" there

monkey isn't the first tier the same ie referencing and credit check as the tenant is paying for as well?

No, the first option is a charge we make for finding tenants. It costs a bomb to advertise in local papers, have our website running, doing phoneouts on new property, running expenses on cars etc. So basically the 75% covers that, and the settlement (i.e having new tenants in office, signing docs and handing keys) and makes profit, they dont get charged extras.
And springlamb, if it makes you feel any better, a reference check wouldn't have shown up his mentality so thats a really unlucky one!

Ok, monkey fair enough...

Thanks for joining this thread as the lone letting voice

Fuck all in my experience of using their tenant finder service for a house I was letting.

Thats ok, was kinda hoping I wouldn't be alone! But at least Im not an estate agent, would nevvvvver admit to that

We are quite lucky with our letting agents. Our boiler packed up last night, I phoned them this morning and it is already fixed, so I've no complaints there.

On the other hand, they are charging us £70 to renew the lease, £20 up on last year which I considered enough of a rip-off. There has been no change in the terms of the lease for the 5 years we have been here so I don't know how they can justify such an enormous figure.

Also our rent has never been late but they still ask for a guarantor. The only people we can ask are my parents (Dh has none) and as they are both pensioners I hate asking. You'd think after all this time of us being excellent tenants they could show a little faith.