9:23 AM, 16th August 2022, About 2 years ago 5
Hello everyone, I am being told, I think, some unusual things about the need for guarantors by a large national agency.
First of all they said there was no need for a guarantor if the tenant met the 2.5 times criteria and refs and the credit history were ok.
The let currently being arranged means the tenant only just meets the criteria of 2.5 times, and in these crazy economic times, when interest rate and rent rises are common, this is enough to worry me.
If I raise the rent, and he hasn’t had a pay rise, then he no longer meets the criteria, but as this is a let only arrangement, any future rent rise and the tenant’s ability to afford it are not their concern in the slightest.
With so many people at risk of either losing a job, or being offered less, or their employers going broke, I am genuinely concerned.
So then I insisted on a guarantor, to be met with resistance and being told it was not necessary.
I stipulated that the guarantor be a home owner….only to be told that they couldn’t demand a guarantor was a home owner.
My reply was that if they weren’t, they wouldn’t be suitable as a guarantor.
Their response to getting proof of home ownership was that they would not be able to prove that the guarantor was a home owner.
I can’t believe that a large national chain is coming up with all this rubbish – other agents I’ve dealt with have ways of asking for this proof.
Is all this unusual?
What is other landlords experience?
It’s looking as though the relationship with the agent is breaking down.