By Steve Roulstone

We have had an interesting experience this week, where a property which was fully managed, has changed to self Management where we only provide the Tenant. The issue here was that the Landlord, having visited the Tenant, was left with the feeling that we had failed to protect them when under full management and had given poor service to the new Tenants because we were no longer instructed to manage.

Tenants advised the Landlord.

The main issue is relating to what the Landlord had been told by the Tenant, which left the Landlord needing confirmation that we had looked after them, no matter what service we were offering. Without repeating the details in full, suffice to say, that by confirming our normal processes, which included signatures confirming the receipt of information and the ability to prove timings through photographic evidence taken at the check in, the Landlord was left understanding that we had done the right thing and carried out our role professionally. The interesting point for me, is that had there not had been other issues, the Landlord may not have had cause to contact us at all and the only result may have been our dis-instruction, without even knowing why!

The bigger picture.

The reason for us being able to prove our case surrounded what had happened with the previous Tenant, as an extension had been built, without the Landlords knowledge at the next door property. The reason the Landlord phoned and mentioned the suggested lack of service to the new Tenants, was to see how this had happened without their knowledge. The answer was really straight forward, the past Tenants had failed to forward mail that was intended for the owners advising them of the neighbours plans and therefore failed to give the Landlord the opportunity to have their feelings taken in too account.

All points covered.

We were able to prove that our agreement included a clause confirming that the Tenant was supposed to forward all mail intended for the Landlord, especially that of an important nature and this is what they failed to do. We were also able to confirm that the agreement banned Tenants from interfering with the supply of services to the property, which was another issue that had been raised. The result of this event, confirms just how important it is to have an agreement whose basis is centred around the protection of the Landlord (and in our case is based upon 30 years of experience) and that ’of the shelf’ agreements have their rightful place – on the shelf!

Consequences.

The serious side is that because of adhering to processes, we were able to confirm our service had been proper and correct and that the Landlord, who of course had gone to self management because there had been no problems over the previous seven years, had received the services that had been paid for. In doing so we were also able to demonstrate that the agreement we use is there to protect the Landlord and clauses do have a purpose.  The Landlord left with the knowledge that they could pursue the previous Tenant for actions that had left them disadvantaged, but this time, because of self Management, the letter would have to be written by themselves, rather than by us!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post Navigation