Shortly after the commencement of the tenancy, the Tenants, Mr and Miss F, raised concerns regarding the Agent’s communication. Firstly, Mr and Miss F alleged that the Agent had provided them with a misleading response in relation to them querying the trading hours of the business on the ground floor of the Property. Secondly, Mr and Miss F raised concerns regarding the condition of the Property.
I found that the Agent had made Mr and Miss F aware that the ground floor premises were to operate as a bar or pub and that this information had been recorded in their contemporaneous progress notes. I, therefore, did not consider that the Agent had provided Mr and Miss F with misleading information regarding the hours during which the premises would operate. Regarding the condition of the Property, I advised that the Agent had been instructed on a tenant-find only basis by the Property’s managing agents. As such, I pointed out to Mr and Miss F that ultimately the responsibility for the condition of the Property lay with the Landlord and that it was the managing agents who were responsible for dealing
with repair and maintenance requests.
As the Agent had advised Mr and Miss F of the nature of the ground floor business and had recorded the conversation (which occurred prior to the start of the tenancy), I considered that the Agent had complied with Paragraph 4f of the Code of Practice and the requirements of the CPRs. I did not support this Complaint.
If the property being offered for let is situated in a non-residential area, the nature of neighbouring businesses (if not apparent during a viewing) should be considered and, if appropriate, be divulged to prospective tenants. This is especially true of businesses such as nightclubs which may not be obviously apparent to viewers during daylight hours.