Thomas
15-05-2006, 13:04 PM
Dear all
I have an agent who intends to rely on a guarantor agreement entered into on my behalf by the agent and the tenants "guarantor". I understand that the guarantor is reluctant to accept the responsibility taken on under the agreement (relationship with tenant is broken down) and raises a few interesting points...
I wonder if anyone has experience or knowledge of the following matters -
1. Guarantor was never given and has never seen a copy of the AST.
2. Agreement purports to apply to current and future / extensions and renewals of lease.
3. Agreement purports to bind estate of "guarantor".
4. There is no right to cancel the agreement.
5. The agreement seems to release the tenant of liability / obligations and, therefore, there is nothing to guarantee!
The guarantor is of the view that the agreement can not bind him because the contract is not complete in its terms (no copy AST), that the terms are unenforceable as unfair contract terms and that even if they were there is no guarantee because the tenant is released from obligation (they all transfer to the guarantor) and thus he is not a guarantor of anything!
Does someone have a view on this? Grateful for any advice - especially if this is a learning point and that I shouldn't throw good money after bad and argue about this.
Thanks
TT
I have an agent who intends to rely on a guarantor agreement entered into on my behalf by the agent and the tenants "guarantor". I understand that the guarantor is reluctant to accept the responsibility taken on under the agreement (relationship with tenant is broken down) and raises a few interesting points...
I wonder if anyone has experience or knowledge of the following matters -
1. Guarantor was never given and has never seen a copy of the AST.
2. Agreement purports to apply to current and future / extensions and renewals of lease.
3. Agreement purports to bind estate of "guarantor".
4. There is no right to cancel the agreement.
5. The agreement seems to release the tenant of liability / obligations and, therefore, there is nothing to guarantee!
The guarantor is of the view that the agreement can not bind him because the contract is not complete in its terms (no copy AST), that the terms are unenforceable as unfair contract terms and that even if they were there is no guarantee because the tenant is released from obligation (they all transfer to the guarantor) and thus he is not a guarantor of anything!
Does someone have a view on this? Grateful for any advice - especially if this is a learning point and that I shouldn't throw good money after bad and argue about this.
Thanks
TT