Problems with letting agent

[homeowner1]

We used what we thought was a reputable letting agent to manage our property. The property was on the market for a very short period of time when the agent found us a tenant on a short term tenancy agreement. We were asked to reduce the rent so the tenant could easily afford it, we agreed in good faith.

All went well for approx 3mths then the payments stopped. The tenant got 4mths in arrears before we realised the seriousness of the problem. LA never informed us of this issue and necessary documents were not being sent to us. The tenancy expired but still the tenant was allowed to carry on living in our property for a further 2mths even though the agent knew no rent had been paid for a number of months. When we realised what was happening we took control and asked for the tenant to vacate the property, luckily they did without putting up a fight. LA did the necessary departing checks on the property and said everything was fine, we did our own checks and found substantial damages. LA continuously covered for the tenant making excuses and denials on their behalf.

Can anyone please advice me at what stage should our LA have taken action and if so what actions should have been taken?

It is now our intention to sue the LA for losses and negligence as we believe he is in breech of his contract as we paid for full management and he failed in his duties. We realise that the LA is not responsible for the damage caused by the tenant but surely they should have nipped the matter of arrears in the bud and not let it get out of hand. Do you think we have a good case as we are still outstanding the arrears and the former tenant has failed to make any further payments and we are now told by the LA that the former tenant cannot be contacted. What are we supposed to do now as the LA wont give us any forwarding address for the former tenant? The bond was secured with the DPS so hopefully we will be awarded that amount.

Oh btw I forgot to mention our former tenant was a member of the LA staff!

[Poppy35]

oh dear!

Ok, as a LA this is what I would of done

Once the tenant was 2 weeks in arrears I would of made a courtesy call to you the client to let you know the situation and that we would monitor the payments and keep you informed.

Once 2 months of rent were overdue I would, as a precautionary measure, served the T with 2 months notice (S21) and then spoken to you the client with advice that possession should be sought under Grounds 8, 10 and 11 of the Housing Act (basically 2 months rent owed).

2 weeks after serving the S8 notice then we would be a position to apply for a court order for eviction which normally takes about a month to come through, court hearing would happen, judge would order possession (possibly 2-4 weeks) and then worst case scenario obtained a warrant to evict them with an bailiff if they still had not left. You seem to have 6 months worth of arrears which really should of been no more than 3-4 months.

Firstly, is your agent ARLA registered? If so you should write a letter to the LA Manager/Head office with a complaint and asking them for their comments on the matter. If you do not receive a reply then I would contact ARLA and ask them to investigate matter - clearly something afoot if it was their own member of staff! Is this member of staff working for the firm still?

One of my staff rents a house from us and woe betide her if she never paid - he life would not be worth living :D

[Paul_f]

Ok, as a LA this is what I would of done.

................I would of made a courtesy call.Poppy, It's would have not 'of' as it has no meaning

[Poppy35]

Oh back to school for me again.........:D

[mind the gap]

Poppy, It's would have not 'of' as it has no meaning
That is patently not true!

'Would of' may be grammatically non-standard, but it would be obtuse to claim it 'has no meaning'. The fact that you could tell Poppy the standard form demonstrates that you knew exactly what she meant. Ergo, it had meaning.

Poppy35's advice was excellent.:)

[johnboy]

Here we go again:rolleyes:

[homeowner1]

Thank you Poppy for your advice it is much appreciated. No courtesy calls were made to tell us of the situation and even when we questioned the LA to see if the tenant was renewing the tenancy as it was about to expire they never mentioned the arrears and at this stage it was at 2 mths. They basically told me they would get back to me, but they just let it drag on until we put a stop to it............resulting in us being owed 4mths arrears in all.

We have contacted the manager of the LA but was basically told that they take no responsiblity for the arrears and they have now advised us to take the former tenant to court as they can no longer contact her. She has recently resigned from her post. They have left phone messages for her but no response. These actions are too little too late and in our opinion the LA just wants to wash their hands of it. We believe the LA is responsible as they did nothing to sort this matter out. It wasnt as though they couldnt contact her .... she worked for them! :mad: Like I said we were paying them for full management and they did not provide that service. We even had to keep chasing them for our statements as they were not being forwarded on to us. It was only when we intervened that they started to try to cover their mistakes and they have been trying to cover their own backs ever since.

The LA seems to be more focused on opening several new branches rather than looking after his customers!

At this stage its our intention to sue the LA for our losses and breach of contract. Would this be the way to go? Are there any other organisations we can contact for help or advice? Any advice greatly appreciated.

[Poppy35]

if they are a corporate firm then I would suggested a strongly worded letter to the top dog setting our your issues.

Im afraid its more paperwork for you and its pointless calling them etc as you wont get anywhere.

Send letters recorded delivery and, as mentioned before, if they are members of a professional body contact this body and report them.

It sounds to me as thought they are negligent but of course it boils down to what it stated in their terms and conditions that you signed with them.

They cant act as your solicitors and take tenant to court but they are there to advise and guide you in the right direction.

[Paul_f]

'Would of' may be grammatically non-standard, but it would be obtuse to claim it 'has no meaning'. The fact that you could tell Poppy the standard form demonstrates that you knew exactly what she meant. Ergo, it had meaning.

Poppy35's advice was excellent.:)Poppy's advice was indeed good.
My Mother-in-Law taught English and thinks it's another appalling example of the 'modern' teacher's acceptance of lower standards. Whether or not it had meaning, it was the result of mispronunciation that we hear every day. Announcers on the BBC on both national and local radio, and many other stations too, frequently refer to 'Febuary' and 'Secetary'. Shame on all the lazy people who are responsible for this!

[mind the gap]

Poppy's advice was indeed good.
My Mother-in-Law taught English and thinks it's another appalling example of the 'modern' teacher's acceptance of lower standards. Whether or not it had meaning, it was the result of mispronunciation that we hear every day. Announcers on the BBC on both national and local radio, and many other stations too, frequently refer to 'Febuary' and 'Secetary'. Shame on all the lazy people who are responsible for this!
:confused:I am not quite sure what your mother-in-law has to do with anything, or why we should revere her opinions on this forum, but here goes!

First, you are leaping to some entirely unreasonable conclusions here. I am presumably one of the 'modern teachers' so reviled by your mother-in-law (who would, I suspect, be equally dismayed by your punctuation of her title - there is no reason to capitalise it!)...and I do not accept lower standards at all. That is why I took the trouble to point out to you that you were wrong to say that 'would of' has no meaning. As I explained, it is grammatically non-standard, but it does communicate. As you are clearly such a stickler for accuracy, I knew you'd want to be put right on that one!

If people choose to pronounce words non-standardly (e.g 'secetary'), it is hardly the end of civilisation as we know it. All it means is that in someone like your mother-in-law may judge the speaker to be poorly educated or inarticulate. She may or may not be correct, but there's a lot of snobbery attached to the way people speak. I doubt 'secetary' would ever fail to convey meaning, but actually, I don't think that's what you are getting in a twist about, is it?

[jeffrey]

Sloppy pronunciation is less of a problem than inaccuracy in orthography.

[mind the gap]

Sloppy pronunciation is less of a problem than inaccuracy in orthography.

That is probably too general a comment to be verifiable. (As always, context is all!)

However, the size of the 'problem' (where speech or writing is concerned), is generally in direct proportion to the degree of non-standardness on the one hand and the degree of formality appropriate to the context, on the other. :)

(The above assumes normal motivation (to understand) on the part of the recipient!)

[homeowner1]

Dont want to sound rude but what have the conversations about the spellings, mother-in-law etc got to do with my thread? :confused:

I am looking for advice on the matter as I am very new to this and I dont want to get it wrong........ much thanks to Poppy for the advice so far it is much appreciated. Any other advice would be greatly appreciated.

Many thanks