Complaint

Mr and Mrs D were the landlords who had instructed the Agent on a tenant find only basis. Following the Agent undertaking this task and installing the tenants in the property, rental payments stopped and Mr and Mrs D found themselves in the position of having to take legal action to regain possession of the property. Mr and Mrs D referred the dispute to my Office following the conclusion of legal action which had removed the tenants from the property but had left them with a substantial shortfall in rent.

Complaint

On the first day of the tenancy, Mr C, the tenant, found that the boiler was not working and
immediately reported the matter to the Agent, explaining that he was unable to live in the property until the problem was fixed. The Agent advised the landlord straight away and arranged for a contractor to attend the property the same day. However, upon investigating the problem the contractor found traces of a rat infestation. The complications in dealing with the two connected issues eventually led to the landlord agreeing to terminate the tenancy with Mr C being refunded his rent and deposit. However, Mr C considered that the Agent could have done more to prevent the situation arising and promptly complained.

Complaint

After moving into the property, the tenants, Mr and Mrs B, contacted the Agent to advise that they were unable to access the garage. The Agent initially responded telling them where they could find the key. The key was not where they said and upon further questioning at a later date stated that the landlord had informed them that the garage was
not operational and unfit for use. Mr and Mrs B subsequently complained that the property had been incorrectly described to them.

Complaint

Shortly after Mr and Mrs A moved into the property they discovered that the landlord, who worked in a neighbouring office, was using the toilet situated in the property. Upon questioning the landlord he advised that his use of the toilet during business hours was a requirement of the let which had been conveyed to the Agent. Mr and Mrs A then raised a
complaint alleging that they had not been informed of this requirement by the Agent prior to agreeing the tenancy and, as such, wished to end the tenancy, demanding the monies they had paid in relation to fees, the deposit and rent to be returned. The Agent argued that Mrs A had been advised during the viewing that the landlord required access to the toilet during his working hours. However, they went on to add that they appreciated Mr and Mrs A’s concerns and, together with the landlord, wished to make them an offer to end the tenancy. Mr and Mrs A refused the offer.

Who is the Landlord?

Two similar cases but with contrasting outcomes highlighting why agents should act on information which brings in to question the authority of the landlord.

Unsatisfactory References

After three months of the tenancy the tenant stopped making rental payments and the landlords instigated proceedings to take possession of the property. At the same time the landlords complained that the agent had introduced an unsuitable tenant and sought compensation via TPO.

Complaint

Following the end of the tenancy and the completion of the check-out inspection, the Tenants alleged that the Agent withheld their security deposit despite advising them that it would be returned. The Agent responded by denying that they had received payment of the deposit at the outset.

Complaint

Parking is often a contentious issue and in this case the Landlord was aware that parking was problematic at the property and had therefore requested that the Agent set out the allocated parking arrangements in the tenancy agreement. However, following complaints from neighbours of the property, the Landlord examined the agreement and complained
to the Agent that they had omitted the requested parking clauses and had been ineffectual in handling the neighbour complaints.

Complaint

The Landlord let the property to the Tenant who paid no rent after the first month. She subsequently complained about the Agent’s referencing. The Agent responded, acknowledging that it had been a fraudulent application but defended their referencing
as adequate in the circumstances.

Complaint

In this case, the Landlord alleged that three pieces of furniture were lost from her property whilst the Agent was instructed and, although the Agent acknowledged responsibility for their oversight, the parties could not agree on the amount of compensation to be paid.

Complaint

The Landlord purchased the property with the Tenant in residence. She then instructed new managing agents and asked the previous owner’s Agent to transfer the deposit to her new agents. Following the Agent refusing to transfer the monies, the Landlord referred the matter to my Office.

Complaint

After viewing the flat and agreeing a six month tenancy, the Tenant moved in to the property. However, after just one night the Tenant decided she could not live there due to noise experienced from neighbours. She demanded her rent and deposit back from the Agent.

Complaint

Following a number of outstanding maintenance issues, the Tenant raised a complaint alleging that the managing Agent had failed to address those matters in a timely manner. They concerned repairs to the toilet and the balcony door, along with the delivery of a replacement fridge.

Sales commission fees in letting agreements

The Ombudsman explains why sales commission fees in letting agency agreements is no longer a grey area

Complaint

The Landlords complained that the Agent had not given adequate notice of the Tenant’s
intention to vacate the property, that they had not chased up rent arrears and that they had
failed to adequately respond to their subsequent Complaint. The Agent responded by stating
that the Landlords were already aware of the Tenant having given notice and referred to the
contemporaneous progress notes on their file to support their view.

Complaint

The Landlord had instructed the Agent to find a tenant which they did. After approximately three months the Tenant stopped paying the rent. The Landlord served a Section 8 Notice on the Tenant who vacated the Property with rent arrears of more than £1,500. The landlord accepted that the Tenant was responsible for paying the rent but after conducting some research she was concerned that the Tenant had passed the Agent’s reference criteria.

Complaint

The Landlords had instructed the Agent to let and manage the Property for a period of more than 19 months. However, following the Tenants vacating the Property, the Landlords subsequently spent £1,500 repairing damage caused by prolonged misuse and a lack of care and cleaning by the Tenants. They claimed on the deposit and sought the balance of their losses from the Agent.

Complaint

The Landlord accepted an offer to let the unfurnished Property on the basis of a 12 month
term. Several days after the Tenancy started, the Tenants informed him that they had requested a double bed via the Agent. He also only had sight of the Tenancy Agreement for the first time at that point and discovered that the term was only for a period of six months. The Landlord had refused an applicant from another agency on the strength of this offer and believed that the Agent had lied about the Tenants’ terms in order to gain a fee.

Complaint

The Landlords complained that the Agent had not obtained their consent before they let the Property to the Tenant at a rent that was somewhat below the amount advertised. The Agent stated that they had obtained the Landlords’ consent, prior to the letting, during a telephone conversation.

Complaint
The Landlord complained about the Agent’s failure to carry out inspections, arrange for
appropriate remedial works to be undertaken and to communicate effectively with her throughout the Tenancy. The Landlord also blamed the Agent’s management for the poor condition that the Property was left in at the end of the Tenancy and the costs incurred by her to return the Property to a satisfactory condition.