UKC

I've had neverending trouble with our letting agency but now have a clear cut case of fraud. We refused to sign our contract until they removed a new clause giving them the right to sell our details to unspecified third parties for unspecified reasons, also to change our energy provider to Spark Energy. They've gone ahead and opened an account with Spark Energy in my name anyway.
They're also sending us bills for 'rent arrears' for the period between contract, bizarre amounts without itemisation. Over the last week these have come in at £910, £2378.08, £3978 and £3578.08. We have offered throughout to pay the actual equivalent of rent for the period, when we receive a fair contract.

Anyway, I've put in my formal complaint for the above and other problems. Their response doesn't argue any of the items of complaint, it just confirms each transgression basically saying 'this is what we do'.

So I can wait 8 weeks and then escalate it to the Property Ombudsman, by which point they'll probably be sending us bills for £10,000, or I can go see a lawyer this week, and hope to recover the consultation fee in the long run. Anyone have any experience of this or advice? Anyone know why letting agencies have to be so greedy and underhanded all the time when they are basically receiving money for nothing?

In reply to trouserburp: Citizens Advice Bureau is your best bet initially. If clearly fraud, I'd suggest police instead of lawyer - why pay to bring a criminal case.

Regard Letting Agents as scum until proved otherwise...

In reply to trouserburp:
Given the lack of background info, you need to seek professional and or legal advice ASAP. CAB was mentioned and this could be the first step to sort out the basics. If fraud is involved, you should be straight to Police also.
Lack of info for an online forum for example - you do not say if in England, Scotland, other; whether private, registered social landlord, or whoever; type of tenancy (eg short assured, assured, etc, etc.); what the previous contract says about continuation, what action has been taken to terminate one and start another, order, timing, did you remove or not, etc, are all potentially important.
BTW, everything else aside, withholding of rent is a sure fire way of getting evicted even if contract is not necessary valid. As a minimum, consider putting all back rent in a escrow account so if it goes to court you can show you have not withheld rent, and the monies are there for the landlord when the details of the contract are sorted.

In reply to Climbing Pieman:

ok, it's in England, contract was an 'assured shorthold tenancy agreement for letting residential dwelling house' period ending 15th September. We notified them that two tenants would be moving out in July and then again 4th September, which to my mind means the contract ended 15th September. The two of us remaining had unconditional permission to stay from both the landlords and the letting agency (in writing) until they sort a contract. We chased the Letting Agency multiple times per week and paid £360 admin fee to get them to start the referencing process, then chased them multiple times again to get them to send the contract, which included the unacceptable terms to open an account in our name and share our details without any restriction.

I don't know if the Police have time to deal with something like this, they don't have time to follow up burglaries and muggings. Feel the same about using up CAB time to be honest, we're not getting evicted or anything.
I think what I am asking is, if I go to a lawyer will it be more energy and trouble than it is worth? If I wait 8 weeks and escalate to the ombudsman will it be more energy and trouble than it is worth? If both are sensible options, which is the most sensible?

Re: the 'rent'. As far as I am concerned there was no contract for the interim time, my housemate paid 25% of the £1600 a month anyway, to the letting agency. Would it be possible to give the rest direct to the landlord or does that put them in trouble? My ideal outcome would be that the landlord changes letting agency before we sign a contract, they're having a look at that option. We have a good relationship with them and they're welcome to the money. I've never heard of an escrow account, is that a good option?

In reply to trouserburp: I'd be straight off to see my lawyer. No way would I wait 8 weeks to go to an ombudsman in this case, especially as it all sounds extremely non standard

In reply to trouserburp:
Firstly, I can't help as I deal with Scottish law.
That said, I would offer comments as below.
Not necessarily ended. Was it a multiple joint tenancy or other? Was succession permissible? Also, depends if correct procedures were followed, at the correct times. And you did not remove which would have a bearing if in Scotland.
That may allow an argument that the original contract continued. Or you are squatters. Or in a grey legal area.
Whether the Police have time or not is not relevant. If fraud is involved action should be take. Why not report to Action Fraud then? You may get eviction action shortly if you do not have a valid contract or if you do are withholding rent.
That all depends on the circumstances, and what the landlord and or their agent will do, or is actually doing behind the scenes.
If there is no contact in your mind, then you are squatting maybe? - dependant on the actual wording of all the documents/letters that were exchanged since the original contract was signed.
Are you allowed to pay the landlord directly? The advantage of an escrow account is you have paid rent albeit it has not yet gone to the agent due to the contract difficulties. It's easier to argue if necessary in court that you have not actually withheld rent if the equivalent monies are in an independent account.
As I said, I deal with Scottish law and so the comments made are only to be helpful as a lay person would try to help and not any form of advice. Take them with a pinch of salt. If you came to me, the original contract is vital and a forensic follow through to the current position is vital to advise properly. If you want to be as protected as you can be, go and bother a CAB as a first step. To wait is very risky, and the ombudsman will only act if the agent is a member of the TPO will they not?

In reply to Climbing Pieman:

Thanks, they are listed with the Property Ombudsman but it sounds like I should go see a lawyer.
How can a contract continue if the period ended and two of the tenants moved out? Are they just liable forever?

In reply to trouserburp: The Ombudsman was very good when I had to take my Letting Agent (Martin & Co) to them for repeatedly lying to me. They claimed that they had not added any extra clauses to the new tenancy agreement, despite me having the last agreement and the new agreement and pointing out the bits they'd added. The Ombudsman called them "Unprofessional, unsatisfactory and confused" and awarded compensation against them. They still refused to pay this, so the Ombudsman got involved again and forced them. Note that they can only award compensation for actual loss (be that money or time), they can't take any punitive action against the Letting Agent.

In reply to trouserburp:

In Scottish law there is a principle where tacit relocation takes place if correct procedures at the correct time do not take place. I do not know if that or similar happens under English law so was just casting doubt just in case there was an equivalent in English law or there was any other relevant English law that would apply to "over rule" the assumption of well I gave notice so that means it definitely ended. Another example would be under Scottish law if correct short assured tenancy procedures and documents where not in force then, it may mean a different tenancy agreement say assured c/w short assured, which in Scotland must be
Scottish short assured(!!!) is actually in effect and that has different ending procedures and timescales. All very complex, but important if either party want to play games! As I say take what I said with a pinch of salt as you are in England.

In reply to trouserburp: i haven't seen your particular contract, but when a contract comes to an end as in date, it then becomes a rolling contract with the same terms apart from notice period.
That is until a new contract is issued and signed.

In reply to trouserburp:

Generally if you don't give formal notice an English assured shorthold tenancy carries on, with 2 months notice from the landlord required, or 1 from the tenant. I stayed in the same place for 10 years on that setup.

Neil

In reply to trouserburp:

It was the case, by the way, that my old contract prohibited changing energy suppliers etc. I think this is legal unless it has changed.

Neil

In reply to Neil Williams:

Well we said two months in advance that two of the tenants are moving out and we will require a new contract with new tenants. What counts as formal notice? I can't believe two tenants that gave notice they were leaving and left are liable forever for rent and fines.

I've just paid them the equivalent of rent for the two months since the contract period expired and said I will continue to pay it retrospectively as I cannot pay prospectively without any of the assurances a tenancy agreement would provide. I'll go see a lawyer this week re: fraud and demands for imaginary sums of money

thanks for the advice

In reply to trouserburp:

Do you have one contract each, or one overall for which you are jointly and severally liable? If the latter, new tenants are only their problem if you all move out, so no notice was legally given on the property.

Neil

In reply to trouserburp:

By the way, you have a tenancy agreement - the previous one rolls.

Neil

In reply to trouserburp:


They're charging you again for credit references to move over onto a rolling contract?

The Energy provider switch is I think your business not theirs (could be wrong) but either way the changed contract appears to be 'like it or lump it' if they're not willing to negotiate. I'd consider writing to the landlord (sealed envelope through the letting agent is probably your only option unless you have their details). Explain you're considering moving as a result of unreasonable contract changes that benefit only the agent. Getting new tenants is expensive and they have marginally more bargaining power with the agent than you do.


I'm not sure which bit is 'clear fraud' to be honest but if you think you're being defrauded then you should report it.


I'd see a lawyer if you think you're getting screwed, waiting will only make it more expensive and the ombudsman is still an option down the line.


So you've not been paying rent since your (6 month?) short hold ended despite still living there? How much would you expect to owe by now and does it tally roughly with the figures they're demanding? They should at least be able to itemise your bill on request.

jk

In reply to jkarran:

"They're charging you again for credit references to move over onto a rolling contract?"

They can't do that to move onto a rolling contract, because that just happens unless they actively do something to prevent it - i.e. give you notice to leave. Some agents do do that because they prefer fixed term contracts. It's up to them what they charge for a renewal, your sole remedy if you think it is unreasonable is to either try to stick on a rolling contract (the best in my view as it offers excellent flexibility) or to move out.

"The Energy provider switch is I think your business not theirs (could be wrong)"

Might be worth thinking of this from the point of view of the landlord.

I'm not sure what law changes have happened that might make this different, but I believe it is legal - think about it from the point of view of the landlord who doesn't want to end up with a 12 month contract on a 6 month lease, or doesn't want the hassle of changing back. It might be a different situation, but if I did a short-term let on my house due to say taking a work placement elsewhere for a year, I would put a stipulation on it that all utilities and services had to be put back the way they were at the end at the tenant's cost, provided it was legal. If I had an investment property I never intended to live in I would probably allow it. Same, for example, with redecorating, putting shelves up etc, provided the quality of the job was professional.

"So you've not been paying rent since your (6 month?) short hold ended despite still living there?"

The fact that he is still living there means it *has not* ended, as he would have to be given notice to leave for this to be the case, it has gone to the legal default of a rolling contract and rent is still due.

The OP needs to answer if it is one contract or separate ones per tenant, and if the phrase "joint and several" appears on it. If so, apart from a bit of clearly cack-handed admin by the agent, the agent is doing nothing whatsoever illegal, and perhaps just being a bit customer unfriendly, which to me would make me consider moving, as there are decent letting agents out there.

Neil

In reply to Neil Williams:

...but the rent *is* due for the period for which it has been unpaid, and the tenant has no right to withhold, and would be best advised to pay otherwise they might land up in court and find it very difficult to rent another property in future.

Neil

In reply to trouserburp: Check with Shelter. They know their stuff

http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/private_renting/about_private_rent...

In reply to Neil Williams:


That's the bit I don't understand, they're either charging again mid-contract for something they've already done or there's missing information in the OP. Maybe new tenants moving in rather than the household getting smaller as people move out?


Surely in that case it just depends what's in the old and the new contract. The new one potentially is negotiable.


Sorry, poorly worded. Should have said the 6 month fixed term part has ended, I'm rather confused as to why the OP stopped paying rent and what they thought would happen.

jk

In reply to trouserburp: Not you as well. We have just been signed up with Spark Energy! You aren't dealing with Reed Rains are you?

In reply to jkarran:

"That's the bit I don't understand, they're either charging again mid-contract for something they've already done or there's missing information in the OP. Maybe new tenants moving in rather than the household getting smaller as people move out?"

Some agents/landlords and some tenants prefer to renew for a further fixed term. This is fine if this is what both parties want or are willing to accept. It is perfectly normal for charges to apply for this. It is similarly within a landlord's right to insist on it if they wish - the rolling tenancy is just what happens if nothing is done.

Needing references again is odd, though.

"Surely in that case it just depends what's in the old and the new contract. The new one potentially is negotiable."

True.

"Sorry, poorly worded. Should have said the 6 month fixed term part has ended, I'm rather confused as to why the OP stopped paying rent and what they thought would happen."

So am I. Well, I can predict that it might result in eviction, bad references and great difficulty renting in the future. It was rather a silly idea; the OP should really have checked their legal situation before making such a move. I expect they were unaware of rolling contracts.

Neil

In reply to Neil Williams:

We also haven't established if the OP is on individual contracts (in which case the contracts of the two who haven't moved out will stand) or joint/several liability (in which case the remaining two tenants are liable for the *full* rent until more are found).

In both cases rent is still due, it's just the amount that is in question.

Neil

In reply to Neil Williams:

Thanks all, I spoke to a lawyer friend of a friend and he says to maintain our stance on removing the unfair clauses from the new contract, and all our other complaints, but pay the rent in the meantime. Seems ridiculous to me that a tenant who advises they are leaving at the end of the contract period, in advance and leaves, remains liable for the joint rent and fines for the rest of their life. Are their kids liable after they die or do the letting agency just inherit a quarter of their estate?

Anyway the landlords have entered the fray now because they have also had enough of the letting agency's lies and mismanagement. The letting agency are starting to backtrack on their demands. I wrote to both energy companies and if the letting agency did try to open an account it hasn't gone through. Guess the letting agency's confession to fraud doesn't mean they actually did it. Might pass the email on to Action Fraud anyway. British Gas have said they won't hand my account over without asking me first.

In reply to trouserburp: On a related note, we had dealings with Spark Energy because they were the suppliers to the previous tenants. I've never had to deal with such a poor company before/since, and would definitely stay away!

In reply to trouserburp: well that depends on the contract you are on which Neil has asked about numerous times.
As an example if I have a couple live in a house I rent they will not be on individual contracts but a joint tenancy, if they break up I'm still going to want rent for the house they they payed collectively. Just because they broke up it's not my problem.
Where as if I rent out four rooms in a house, I would have them on separate contracts, that may or may not include bills.
If not all tenants will be jointly liable for the bills whilst they reside there, in this case to make things easier I would probably have token meters installed so the liability didn't just fall onto the one person every quarter whose name is on the bills.