The Property Ombudsman (TPO) has made further expulsions after six agents failed to comply with parts of the TPO Codes of Practice and pay subsequent awards made by the Ombudsman. Whilst some of the agents appear to have ceased trading, others have re-opened trading under the same name but with different directors. Once again, all of the complaints against the agents were in relation to lettings work.

Landlords and tenants are being warned that yet another local letting agent in East London has been expelled from The Property Ombudsman (TPO) scheme for failing to pay an award made by the Ombudsman. Following the expulsion of William Huxley and Lang & Ward earlier in the year, Citi Places Management Ltd (trading as Citi Places Management) is the latest agent in the area which can no longer legally trade until the outstanding award is paid.

Buyers, sellers, tenants and landlords in Grays, Essex, are being warned that a local estate and letting agent Elite Properties Essex Ltd (trading as Elite Properties) has been expelled from The Property Ombudsman (TPO) scheme. This means the agent can no longer legally trade until the outstanding award is paid.

Landlords and Tenants in Newport, Wales, are being warned that a local letting agent Pinkmove Lettings Newport Limited, (trading as Pinkmove Lettings Limited from Conway Road, Newport¹) has been expelled from The Property Ombudsman (TPO) scheme. This means the agent can no longer legally trade until the outstanding award is paid.

Buyers, sellers, tenants and landlords in Redhill, North Somerset, are being warned that a local estate and letting agent PM Premier Limited (trading as PM Premier Ltd) has been expelled from The Property Ombudsman (TPO) scheme. This means the agent can no longer legally trade until the outstanding award of £500 is paid.

Buyers, sellers, tenants and landlords in Southampton are being warned that a local estate and letting agent, CE Property Ltd (trading from Bitterne Precinct as Charles Carr), has been expelled from The Property Ombudsman (TPO) scheme. This means the agent can no longer legally trade until the outstanding award of £350 is paid.

Landlords, tenants, house buyers and sellers in West Kensington, London, are being warned that a local estate agent Madox Estates Ltd, (trading as Madox) has been expelled from The Property Ombudsman (TPO) scheme. This means the agent can no longer legally trade until the outstanding award is paid.

Seven estate and letting agents have been expelled from membership of The Property Ombudsman (TPO) after failing to comply with parts of the TPO Codes of Practice and pay subsequent awards made by the Ombudsman, totalling £112,257.04.

On 1^st June, The Property Ombudsman (TPO) scheme’s updated Codes of Practice will become effective. The revisions are substantial, and incorporate the Tenant Fees Act, Client Money Protection and GDPR requirements.

TPO consulted with 44 different organisations and individuals during the review process. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) and The National Trading Standards Estate Agency Team (NTSEAT) provided a technical review of the lettings and sales codes respectively. Along with the Scottish Sales Codes, they were then scrutinised and approved by CTSI. The new Codes are available on TPO Codes page which will soon be revised to include a facility to put forward requests for future changes to the codes.

The Property Ombudsman has issued a reminder to all agents to ensure they have the correct redress membership to cover the work they undertake. This comes after a letting agent was issued with a £3,000 penalty by their Local Authority for not having redress membership to cover their Residential Leasehold Management work, despite being a member of The Property Ombudsman for Sales and Lettings.

The Property Ombudsman (TPO) has today [8^th May 2019] released its 2018 annual report reflecting ever-increasing consumer demand for the service.

The report reveals TPO received a record number of enquiries in 2018 (29,023), up 22% on 2017.  Of these, 4,246 went on to be formal complaints, which also rose significantly year on year by 16%. 

A case that The Property Ombudsman was asked to review came from buyers who stated that the agent misrepresented the property they purchased at auction as they failed to make them aware that the property was tenanted or that there were only 55 years remaining on the lease. The buyers were seeking the return of the £3,000 reservation fee they paid which the agent had transferred to the seller following their withdrawal from the purchase.

A case that The Property Ombudsman was asked to review came from buyers concerning the accuracy of the information within the local authority search compiled by the search provider (SP).

A case that The Property Ombudsman was asked to review came from landlords about non-payment of rent and damage to the property. The landlords let the property to the agent as a tenant under a three-year agreement, giving the agent the authority to sub-let the property in return for a guaranteed rent. The complaints concerned events at the end of that agreement, including rent for a period when a sub-tenant’s belongings remained in the property, and damage to the property and contents that was found when the landlords regained possession.

A case that The Property Ombudsman was asked to review came from a leaseholder. The agent was instructed by the freeholder to provide a management service in respect of the block in which the property was situated. Installation of water meters The leaseholder complained that the agent did not consult her about the installation of communal water meters, saying that the agent did not provide clear responses in a timely manner to her queries about the installation of the meters and the effect this would have on her water bill.

A case that The Property Ombudsman was asked to review came from a landlord concerning the referencing that was undertaken by the agent on the tenants. The landlord explained that she was assured by the agent, before she agreed to the tenancy, that the tenants (Ms A and Mr B) had passed referencing checks. After the tenancy commenced, the landlord stated that the tenants paid no further rent, that Mr B became threatening, and that the tenants harassed the occupant of the first floor flat, the landlord’s sister.

A case that The Property Ombudsman was asked to review came from a buyer who stated that the agent misrepresented the property purchased as they failed to make them aware that concerns had been raised as to the type of cladding at the property, following the Grenfell fire. Central to this case was the fact that the same company was both managing the block, via their block management company, and instructed by the sellers of the flat for sale.

A case that The Property Ombudsman was asked to review came from a buyer about two issues raised in the survey. The buyer instructed the surveyor to carry out the building survey report. Two issues were the subject of the complaint.

A case that The Property Ombudsman was asked to review came from a seller who was facing commission fee claims from two agents.

This was a dual fee dispute, with the seller having paid a commission fee to the second Agent (Agent 2) for the sale of the property and later being pursued for a commission fee by the first Agent (Agent 1) which had not been paid.

Kevin Hollinrake, former estate agent and now Conservative MP for Thirsk and Malton, has been announced as the final member of the ‘panel of experts’ due to participate in, what is likely to be, a lively panel debate at The Property Ombudsman Conference on 10th July 2019. 

 Kevin represents the constituency where he was born and brought up and now lives with his wife and four children. He was elected to Parliament in May 2015 and holds the position of Parliamentary Private Secretary to DEFRA Secretary of State, Michael Gove.  He serves on the Housing, Communities and Local Government Select Committee.