D*** letting agents

[Seafort]

Duplicate post on Scut's



Any ideas?

My parents moved abroad for a year, let the old family home through a letting agent. They opted for a reduced income on the basis that it would be paid monthly wether occupied or not.

When thier representative recieved the keys back at the house it was noted that items of furniture were missing (beds, 3 piece, chairs,pics etc). The agency maintains that the thefts occured 6 months ago, before the last tennents moved in. They reported it to the Police and were told it was a civil matter.
They [agents] failed to report this to the rep' and do not admit any responsibility for the 'goods' missing from the inventory.

Ma and Pa say they bought landlords insurance through the same agency but can't find the policy, in the rep's dealings with them it has not been mentioned.

The Police suggest the small claims court. I guess the question is.....

Has anyone here been through the same?
Or
Any advice on the way to go? (off the cuff like)!

At the mo' Ma not looking forward to returning, Pa's gone for a drink, Sunset rum probably.

Any erudite thoughts welcome.

Dave.

 

[Talbot]

head straight for the small claims court, list all the people who might have been responnsible, and let the court decide. - but I am not a lawyer.

 

[boatmike]

I am not a lawyer either but I have been involved in contract law. It would seem that the first thing to do in my humble opinion would be to bring a case against the agent for negligence. The key question is "what are the terms and conditions of the contract you have with the agent and can it be shown that in recognising the theft 6 months ago and not reporting it to you (or your representative) they have constructively hindered prosecution of the offenders. My guess would be that they probably thought in reporting it to the police they had discharged their responsibilities. Sorry..... don't think this washes as theyare expected to take all reasonable steps. The insurance matter is secondary but regardless of the lost policy the same agents who sold it to you should have a copy and deal with any claim. The way to get them off their collective "not my fault guv" attitude would be to sue them. If there is an insurance policy in force that would protect them from liability you can be sure they will find it given this incentive... Rather than go immediately to the SCC I would approach the agents firmly (but not aggressively or rudely) stating your intent and belief that they are liable. If this does not elicit a constructive response I would see a solicitor and get him to write to them. Only if this fails would I proceed to court as the first question you will be asked when you get there is "what attempts have you made to resolve this before applying to the court" I repeat though. I am not a lawyer, it's just what I would explore first. I would not go to law however even in the SCC without taking advice from a solicitor first.

 

[snowleopard]

in my limited experience of litigation, lawyers seem to tell you what you want to hear, telling you that you have a good case even when you have precious little chance, so be cautious.

 

[Sea Devil]

I have used the small claims court against rogue electricians and plumbers - paid a proper expert in the field to write a report and armed with that went forth - several times for each claim... Quite a lot of hassle and work - only good thing was the court awarded me expenses from my boat in Turkey + Greece on top of the refund ..... Not withstanding all that you need a pretty open and shut case to make it worth while.
What is the real monetary value of the items lost???

I have been in the flat letting game for a while - always expect the worst! Never never use agents except to find a tenant if you really really need that. From there on in check the rent is paid monthly yourself. Do an inventory and a state of the property but be reasonable with the tenants... When it all goes bad then the best thing to do is to cut your losses - redecorate or refurnished and get it let out asap!
works for me..

 

[Seafort]

Thanks everyone.

It would seem that the letting agency are the tennents (from the agrement) and sub-let. This was so a guaranteed monthly income could be relied on. I would estimate that this has cost my parents £2.5K over the year.

Full inventories were agreed and we have photo's. The biggest problem here is the effect it has had and if it is going to cause Ma to change the 'Dream' for thier retirement.

If they do continue to let I think it will be a private affair in the future.

Thanks again

Dave.

 

[Sea Devil]

I have been offered those deals quite often - let us take over your flat and we will guarantee you an income and be the tenant and sub let it. Only means they are paying you less rent than than they think they can let it out for and if it all goes pear shaped they can walk - DIY is so easy and I have cruised for years doing it that way... With cheap and charter flights you just come back and sort it out then sail.... Hope your parents can keep the dream alive!

 

[boatmike]

And if they had taken a solicitors advice before signing the contract they would not have a problem now I would guess.
It dismays me that people sign contracts without understanding or even reading them. The only point in a contract in the first place is to protect the parties in case of some event which is never questioned until afterwards when it's too late.
Consulting a solicitor gives you double protection in that if he gives you misleading or bad advice you can sue him too. Thats why they have professional indemnity insurance.
DIY legal contracts are like DIY anything else. OK if you know what you are doing. If you don't, consult an expert.

 

[Sea Devil]

I do not really agree with you Mike.

My experience is that if things go wrong the best thing to do is to cut your losses and accept what has happened - the biggest problems are tenants not paying or leaving just before the end of the contract not having paid the last months rent and stealing or damaging the place.

If they do not pay then all the solicitors or contracts in the world cannot get money from 'a man of straw' - no point at all in pursuing if you think they have lost their job, gone broke or just run out of dosh!

The last months rent is also a problem - they may or may not give you notice but they do not pay the last month - you chase - 'no problem it's in the post' or 'The bank say they sent it to you' etc etc - The landlord has got the last months rent in the form of the original deposit but claiming against the 'disappearance act' is difficult - you have to find them, then you have to prove the damage, then you have to prove they stole - whatever - Legal fees will soon outstrip the value of the assets lost and the small claims court takes time and effort - On balance you just accept it as being a landlord and put it against tax.....
Thats how I try to think and keep calm when it happens to me..........

 

[Sea Devil]

I do not really agree with you Mike.

My experience is that if things go wrong the best thing to do is to cut your losses and accept what has happened - the biggest problems are tenants not paying or leaving just before the end of the contract not having paid the last months rent and stealing or damaging the place.

If they do not pay then all the solicitors or contracts in the world cannot get money from 'a man of straw' - no point at all in pursuing if you think they have lost their job, gone broke or just run out of dosh!

The last months rent is also a problem - they may or may not give you notice but they do not pay the last month - you chase - 'no problem it's in the post' or 'The bank say they sent it to you' etc etc - The landlord has got the last months rent in the form of the original deposit but claiming against the 'disappearance act' is difficult - you have to find them, then you have to prove the damage, then you have to prove they stole - whatever - Legal fees will soon outstrip the value of the assets lost and the small claims court takes time and effort - On balance you just accept it as being a landlord and put it against tax.....
Thats how I try to think and keep calm when it happens to me..........

 

[boatmike]

You seem to have two posts disagreeing with me. One would do!
Actually I take your point. If the only remedy is to chase the absconders 6 months after they have gone there is indeed little point in proceeding.
My question was really about the contract they had with this "agent". Had it been me I would have interrogated the contract with them to see if they could be held liable. I have in fact been quite successful persevering with claims when others gave up but I guess having lived in the USA I am trained to sue if there is any chance of redress and over there (and I think here too now) there are lawyers that will take the case on on a no gain no pain basis, so there is little to lose.
As I indicated before to take on a "duty of care" to manage the property and not to inform the owner when there is theft, is negligent and they have made redress against the tenants doubly difficult by delaying any action. I think it could be claimed that their reporting it to the police is irrelevant because this is a civil matter that could have been persued at the time by the owner had he known. Smells of damages to me! But hey, I would not have taken out insurance against such losses and then lost the policy either! Their best bet is to contact the insurers through the agent and determine if they are indeed insured. If so no problem. If not the only redress they have is against the agent.
Just because the agent says he is not liable does not mean he has no liability. Only a court can decide that!

 

[cliffb]

One small...but pertinant point worth bearing in mind.
Even if you go to a Small Claims Court....and get a judgement in your favour... it doesn't mean you'll get the money. For that you need to go through a whole lot more rigmarole....and still they may not pay.
Cut the losses, learn and move on. That's my advice. FWIW

 

[summerwind]

But doesn't the capital gain on the house during the time it was rented make the cash flow somewhat unimportant? Its all a matter of balance.

If the oldies had sold the house and invested the proceeds in a safe vehicle, would their net wealth be greater or lesser than it is now?

My guess, based on the above posts, is that they are better off.

Everything has a cost. You want a cast iron income, buy fixed interest securities. You want income and capital growth, buy equities and property. You want what you want without cost - harder to find than the Holy Grail.

 

[Grehan]

What has happened is of course unfair and outrageous, especially to - older folk; parents. It's not surprising they and you are upset, because it ought not to have happened and you/they've been treated cruelly.

but

It is also so easy for life's nasty tricks to assume such an importance that one thinks of nothing else but ways to 'get back' and 'get justice'. This kind of thinking leads to sleepless nights, and days weeks and months filled with thinking up and trying to action all sorts of strategems that might just lead to success. Almost as damaging as the original crime. Of course, as soon as you involve lawyers you're paying by the minute. Although a lawyer's stiff letter 'before procedings' can work a treat, it is also easy for the unscrupulous to play the system, ignoring letters, postponing court appearances and binning court orders-to-pay.

I've been there.

Property - er, speculation? (buying, renting, selling) - can be a tough game. Some things go well, some don't. Some tenants can be nightmares, some as sweet as pie. Ditto agents, and deals, and the whole shebang. For 'sell up and sail-ers' it can indeed, work well but you have to take the rough with the smooth - anticipate the rough. Ask yourself "what's going to go wrong?".

Best advice (probably most difficult advice) is to mark it down to experience.
Move on.
It's not right, but it's best.





Either that, or go get an iron bar and break their bloody legs . .
[no, don't]