Claim against letting agent

[superlightr]

andypj said:

I would guess that there was some sort of letter of intent from the letting agent or landlord stipulating the move date? If there is then I reckon you are fair game. Just make sure you are pursuing the right party - is your contract with the LL or the LA?

Ultimately, it is not reasonable behaviour for letting agents to behave in this sort of way. You cant suddenly move (or cancel a move) properties with a 12 hour period and renting is a very expensive business so to expect to have some sort of overlap with another property is unreasonable.

whats not reasonable behaviour? Should a landlord or agent wait until a property is actually empty before re-advertising?

If a current tenant gives notice and then does not move out then we are stuck. Doesnt happen often but can do hence why nothing is signed until we are certain. Equally the prospective tenant could back out until the day they sign.

[Drawweight]

superlightr said:

Equally the prospective tenant could back out until the day they sign.

If the OP had tried that I wonder how much of his 2k the letting agent would try to hold on to?

[JustinP1]

Drawweight said:

superlightr said:

Equally the prospective tenant could back out until the day they sign.

If the OP had tried that I wonder how much of his 2k the letting agent would try to hold on to?

In theory though, if there's no contract in place, his rent and deposit should be coming back to him, although he would lose his fee paid for references I expect.

[citizenmtb]

On acceptance of the property the agent took £200 for processing and I signed paperwork that rent + deposit funds would be cleared into their accounts prior to moving in.

Sounds like it's mostly a waste of my time to pursue. It also sounds like a situation that it is not possible to protect yourself from?

[PurpleMoonlight]

citizenmtb said:

Sounds like it's mostly a waste of my time to pursue. It also sounds like a situation that it is not possible to protect yourself from?

You would likely minimise your risk if the property is not tenanted at the time of application.

[JustinP1]

citizenmtb said:

On acceptance of the property the agent took £200 for processing and I signed paperwork that rent + deposit funds would be cleared into their accounts prior to moving in.

Sounds like it's mostly a waste of my time to pursue. It also sounds like a situation that it is not possible to protect yourself from?

I was going to post this on the first page, however, I recently posted up details of my experience of how a business used shoddy contractual terms in the same situation as the OP on the front page of a thread, and it didn't end well....


My second to last experience with a lettings agent was where they asked me to look at a piece of paper which informed me that it wasn't a contract in any way, but it had their terms on it and I had to sign it.... I had to agree to pay them money for referencing and that I would lose this money if I pulled out. But, the landlord had the option of turning me down and the agent could just hand my money back.

To say it was a grey area they were pushing into was an understatement. In that situation we desperately wanted the house was wasn't up for a hypothetical argument, and in the end it worked out fine....

After a blip where I asked for a copy of the tenancy agreement to view, and they told me I couldn't see it until the morning I was moving in! In short, their contractual processes were a complete mess, culminating in my wife and I having to put more than 100 sets of initials in various places in the contract they set out. Again, I wasn't up for an argument about the pointlessness of their procedures as our stuff was waiting in two vans up the road...


You might have signed to say that you will have the money with them in good time, however, I doubt that there is anything that could be clung onto to give you traction.

In terms of your losses, how do they break down, what kind of figures are we talking about?

Edited by JustinP1 on Friday 9th October 13:59

[JustinP1]

PurpleMoonlight said:

citizenmtb said:

Sounds like it's mostly a waste of my time to pursue. It also sounds like a situation that it is not possible to protect yourself from?

You would likely minimise your risk if the property is not tenanted at the time of application.

Exactly this.

Or, failing that, arrange a moving in date which is at least a few days after the old tenants move out.

[superlightr]

JustinP1 said:

Exactly this.

Or, failing that, arrange a moving in date which is at least a few days after the old tenants move out.

still doent help if the current tenants dont actually move out. There may have been a suitable gap when the OP went to view but if the tenants just stayed by a few days as their new place wasnt ready there is not a lot the agents/landlords can do apart from try and shuffle everyone else down the line.

It is a bit of chicken and egg.

[gshughes]

If the previous tenants don't move out when their lease is up, presumably the letting agents / landlords will charge them additional rent for this period? (or do they let them stay there for free out of the goodness of their hearts - I doubt it), so they could at least pass this onto the new tenants as a goodwill gesture.

[superlightr]

gshughes said:

If the previous tenants don't move out when their lease is up, presumably the letting agents / landlords will charge them additional rent for this period? (or do they let them stay there for free out of the goodness of their hearts - I doubt it), so they could at least pass this onto the new tenants as a goodwill gesture.

errrrrr how do you work that out?

The rent is still due from the current tenant to the landlord for living in the property. nothing is due to the new applicant as they are not a tenant yet and dont have a contract.

What if the old tenant stays for 2 more months should the landlord pay the prospective tenant that 2 months rent?

[Chrisgr31]

It is extremely likely that any written correspondence from the agent in advance of the tenancy agreement being signed was marked "Subject to Contract" to make it clear that a contract is not being created earlier than intended.

As others have mentioned as a landlord or landlords agent your options are limited if a tenant doesn't move out on the day they are meant to. You are not allowed to go straight in and evict them. So if as an incoming tenant you want to guarantee this won't happen to you you need to be looking at already vacant property, and then hope squatters don't take occupation!

[thelawnet1]

Landlord shouldn't really be aiming to move new tenants in and old ones out on those timescales.

[tony wright]

citizenmtb said:

I was due to move into a flat on the 17th September but there were complications that meant I could not move, the issue was that I was not notified with any certainty until the 16th @ 13:00hrs.

Surely if you were supposed to move in on the 17th, the agents should of been all over it on 15th at the latest. They would have to organise the move out inspection, followed by the cleaning and require a minimum of two days. So at best they have to shoulder the blame, they would of been aware the old occupant was not going on the original planned date if they were sticking to their schedule.