Charges that should be banned

Letting Agents are the worst, when charging fees. I worked for a letting agent and they get away with anything because they are not regulated. Estate Agents do not need qualifications to do their job and literally make the rules up as they go along. They charge around £300 for reference fees and admin fees for tenancy agreements. To obtain a reference only costs about £17.00 (that was in 2002) prices may have increased since then but they do charge over the odds. Tenancy Agreements are drawn up once and only the names and the tenants, the date on which occupation is going to be and the address of the rental property is typed onto these and yet they charge £50 per tenant and £50 per landlord.

Letting Agents are rip-off merchants because some do not put the reference monies they receive through their books and a lot of money laundering goes on. Also I have worked for a Company who received a Housing Benefit payment from the Council but it was not passed on to the tenant by the owner of the business. Also, tenants were able to move temporarily into a landlord’s property until the one they were going to rent became available. The Landlord was abroad but the money received went to the owner of the Letting Agent and was not passed on to him.

I strongly believe that Letting Agents should be regulated just as Estate Agents who sell properties are. They carry out valuations of properties without qualifications and rely on what other letting agents are renting properties out for (i.e. the market value).

Not to mention the staff who use vacant properties for assignations. I worked for a business dealing with blocks of flats which was a sideline for a long-established who also had a letting and selling sides. When they sold it to an insurance company I suspect the standards slid considerably as it was no longer a named local person who would suffer any reputational damage.

Accountants in London care not what is done provided the money comes through.

Could something be done about it. Certainly it could and it does not require any particular genius to sort out something better.

Listening to Radio Four on Monday there was the a discussion on rogue letting agents. One of the salient points is the deposit being taken and not deposited in a scheme. You would think it very simple for an organisation to be in control of all deposits and that the landlord/agent is cut out from the loop of holding money.

Renters would only be allowed to deposit direct to this holding company and identifying the address, agent and the landlord. You will appreciate that this would help prevent the multiple letting of the same flat. The scenario quoted had an agent?[fraudster] renting the same flat to multiple people. Total fraud jailed for £220,000

As for those who seek to operate in a cash only environment be it landlords, agents or renters then arrange for a certain number of undercover agents work to catch them with swingeing penalties like loss of property for two years, jail, or loss of deposit. A few well-publicised cases and a transparent new system I think would speedily correct the market.

As to whom is paying for this? Well the deposits will add up to a very tidy sum and I anticipate the interest to be the primary source.

You may also consider that a single national database of properties for rent might help the letting business become more respectable.

I should also mention a family member was employed by a national letting chain to do inventories and his tales … some would curl your hair with what tenants have done to properties.