An easy way to regulate the lettings industry

Whenever I have used IT employment agents to find work, it has been very clear that they are acting for the client and hence I have never expected them to do anything for me as the candidate.   For example, I have never got a job offer on the paper headed with the employment agent’s name and logo only showing the employers name hidden in small print.

However in my experience as a tenant, all the letting agents branded the tenancy agreement with their logo and company name making it look like they are the provider of the property.    Likewise in adverts on RightMove and elsewhere the agents don’t make it clear they are acting only for the landlord.  (Property selling agents see to avoid a lot of these problems, as they get paid by the vendor not the buyer.   While renting agents are seen to be paid by the tenant with them then passing on what is left after the charges to the landlord.)

Hence it is very easy for tenants to believe they are the customer of the agent and that the agent should do what is best for the tenant.   Maintenance admin staff working for agents that spend all day answering phone calls from tenants with this mind-set can very easily be forgiven for developing the same mind-set themselves.  Saying no to a tenant is often harder than passing another bill onto the landlord.

I think tenants are more likely to talk to each other about the quality of property and repair service they have got var a local letting agents, then none local landlords are to talk each other.  So an agent must keep the tenants happy if they are to stay trading, regardless of the fact that they are required to “work for the landlord throughout”.

Due to having properties at a distance I only know one other landlord with a property close to one of ours.  (I have never seen the point in asking an agent for reference from landlords, as all agents have some happy small landlords and the service given to large landlords is unlikely to match the service given to a landlord with a single property.)

I am very glad that I am not the “pig in the middle” in this mess of conflicting expectations!

Why thanks  a lot Ian !!!

"I am very glad that I am not the “pig in the middle” in this mess of conflicting expectations!"

Oink, oink LOL

Ian I did not exclude accidental Landlords they fall into the same categories as those who make the decision to become Landlords.

In your second post you illustrate what I call the "yes but" mentality sometimes known as the "cake and the ha'penny". It is not about the legal relationship Landlords have with others who help to manage their properties it is about which parts of our jobs we are out-sourcing. Even when I am overseeing for my sister, who lives abroad, I am her Agent and would therefore need to be regulated.

Marks suggestion does not involve red tape, its simple and that is why it has a good chance of success.

If a Tenant pays an Agent that Tenant is a customer.  When both the Landlord and the Tenant pay the Agent there is, in my opinion, a conflict of interest.

I know Agents who charge both the Landlord and the Tenant for the same services, Tenancy Agreement, Referencing and Inventory to name the three most common. Who is the Agent working for?

There is a big different between paying for a service as a customer and employing a person to act as your agent. so long as the position is made clear I can't see why a Property Manager can't act as agent for a landlord and charge fees to customers which are tenants. I'm no expert on agency law but I do know enough about it to know this doesn't have to be a problem. The real problem is perceptions.

If I use an Agent as a Landlord I do not "employ" him I pay for his services. If I use an Agent as a Tenant I also pay for his service. I cannot see any legal difference?

An Agent is, by definition, a "go between" and therefore he will have two clients. That Agent may charge each of those clients for the services that he performs ON THEIR BEHALF but not for services which are also being charged to the other client in the transaction.

An Estate Agent performs a similar service but charges the client who is selling not the client who is buying. A Solicitor would not be allowed to work for both the buyer and seller (it might cut costs if they could) because of conflict of interest.

I know several Landlords who charge an admin fee of around £150 and if the Tenant is prepared to pay that fee its fair enough. I heard of an Agent recently who charged £440 admin fee for a one bed flat shared by a couple on a joint AST. The cheeky monkey charged the same fee again to renew the AST for a second term and everything was done electronically and not very well. I wonder if the Landlord was also charged the renewal fee?

If I used an Agent I would be happy to pay for his services but not for him to charge my Tenants for the same services again. I would want to be clear that he has no confict of interest because he is being paid only by me.
 

The difference Mary is that you would have a contract with your Letting Agent and that contract means that you are employing his services,  outside of the generally accepted conditions of employment law but well within the conditions of agency law. A tenant has no such contract as he's simply a purchaser of services. The morality of double charging is not what I'm questioning. That's another debate for another day. First things first, let's get Letting Agents who handle client money licenced, support the good ones and drive the real crooks out of the business.

Mary on top form again!!
You gonner have to start paying her soon MARK.... LOL!!

Paul, if I know Mary, and I think I know her pretty well, she wouldn't take money even if I offered it. We are kindred spirits and we do what we do here for the love of our industy. Neither of us would compromise our integrity or independence for financial gain.

Here, here!
And just as a matter of interest are there any let's say small and perhaps less knowlegeable LL out there that for whatever reason choose not to comment.
You have well informed individuals who post regularly; I am not including myself as knowledgable!.
It would be good if those with less lnowledge could post and perhaps learn a lot from responses from the more informed posters.
So they would not be considered as ignorant; but just genuinely eliciting information in perhaps obvious anwers to their genuine enquiries.
I have learnt an awful lot by making relevant responses.
It would be interesting to hear about other small LL and their experiences; problems and issues.
This as I am sure we can al learn from individual experiences.
You have massive newsletter circulation.
It would be interesting to hear from those landlords who may consider themselves amateurs and perhaps may feel intimidated by the expertise that presents itself on the site.
Perhaps there could be a sectrion for newbies of for those less sure of thenmselves where they could post without any concerns being shown for lessor knowledge than the usual poster.