Complaint

Following the eventual eviction of the Tenants, the Landlord complained to the Agent that their referencing process had been flawed as it had not divulged a number of financial issues of which, had she known, meant she would not have agreed to the tenancy. The Agent acknowledged some shortcomings, but refused to make an offer equivalent to the loss of rent that the Landlord was seeking.

Complaint

Upon application for the tenancy, the prospective tenants, Mr and Miss D, were charged a holding deposit/administration fee of £500 which, following their references being declined, was withheld by the Agent. Mr and Miss D complained that the fee was unfair, especially as the Agent had not fully considered all of the referencing information provided.

Complaint

Following the tenancy commencing problems arose in relation to the credibility of the tenants following a request from a third party for the refund of £6,700 paid from their credit card without their permission for the deposit and advance rent. The Landlords, Mr and Mrs C, subsequently complained that the Agent (instructed on a tenant find only basis) had failed to undertake the necessary referencing checks on the tenants which, had they done so, would have exposed the applicants as serial fraudsters.

Complaint

In this case the Agent arranged a tenancy for two years in favour of four tenants who had offered to pay £200 per month more than the previous tenants. The landlords, Mr and Mrs J, were understandably happy that the Agent had found tenants willing to pay a higher level of rent. However, nine months into the tenancy Mr and Mrs J were contacted by the police to advise that they intended to raid the property as the heat signatures detected from the building indicated that it may be being used for drug cultivation. Furthermore, the police advised Mr and Mrs J that the persons living in the property were not those as recorded in the tenancy agreement and that references may have been forged. Following the raid, which found that the property was being used as a cannabis farm, Mr and Mrs J complained to the Agent stating that they should have been more diligent in their referencing. The Agent responded by arguing that, as per a previously arranged tenancy, they had not used a referencing service provider, adding that the documents provided by the tenants contained no information which should have put them ‘on notice’ that something may have been wrong.

Complaint

Following the end of the tenancy and the tenancy deposit scheme awarding the full amount of the deposit to Mrs I (the landlord) in respect of damage caused to the property, she raised 21 different complaints concerning the Agent’s conduct which she asserted had contributed to the problems arising. Mrs I’s central claims were that the tenant found by the Agent was unsuitable for the property, that they failed to undertake proper references and that they did not carry out inspections during the tenancy which would have alerted her to the problems sooner. The Agent’s response was that they had obtained acceptable references, that they were not responsible for the tenant’s behaviour and that they were, therefore, not liable for the balance of the costs not settled by the security deposit.

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.

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

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

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

Following the tenant falling behind with the rent, Mrs C (the Landlord) applied to the Court for possession of the property.