Monthly Archives: August 2012

You are browsing the site archives by month.

By Steve Roulstone

An Agent who went bankrupt with liabilities of over £400,000 has been found guilty by an NAEA hearing and fined £2500.00. At the same time it has been confirmed following an investigation by The Insolvency Services that he has been banned from being a Company Director for fight years.

Figures confirmed.

The report confirms a figure close to £40000 as being the amount they say Landlords and Tenants lost as a result of his failure to comply with the 2004 legislation regarding Tenants deposits in the correct manner. What appears to be missing from the research I have carried out is any conviction, as it was the Landlords who were then made liable for the subsequent fines of up to three times the deposit that followed from the failure of GDH to register them correctly.

Total?

It is obvious therefore that the total cost to Landlords and Tenants will never be known, but a conservative estimate of around £75000 would seem to be reasonable; depending upon how many Landlords were levied with the appropriate fine (Three times the original deposit)

Fair?

Now is it me? As an Agent who has constantly banged the drum for registration of Letting Agents for the last ten years, being banned from being a Director and slapped with a £2500 fine, does not seem to be fair when all of the individual cases (and there will be many to make up this kind of figure) are taken in to account? In my opinion, what would seem fairer as far as the Industry is concerned would be that he was never allowed to work as a Letting Agent ever again. This kind of punishment can only come as the result of an Industry protected under legislation and proves to me once again that the Government should be able to see that intervention is needed.

Total ban.

I say total bane, because we all know how simple it is to start again with a relative as a Director and it is only a total ban (as in lost the right to be associated) that would be fair in my opinion to all those who lost money.  It is only through Government legislation that such a rule could be enforced. Only then, would Landlords and Tenants know that they and their money was protected.

Systems exist.

And let’s not forget, that such systems to protect our customers already exist! To register with most professional bodies means monies need to be accounted for within the auditing requirements of remaining a member.  It would also be a simple step to have all deposits registered with people other than Agents own Clients account, such as DPS even though this is something I have spoken out against in the past (How would a Solicitor react to being told he could not keep clients funds?) it would be a small sacrifice as opposed to having workable legislation! And then Safe Agent, the latest initiative from professional bodies within the Industry, which already provides all the protection needed for any Landlord or Tenant!

Not far now.

I believe that it is inevitable that the Government will legislate and cases such as this show the need, all we now require is for the systems professional Agents have put in place and promoted, to be endorsed by a Government and hopefully a more suitable and long standing deterrent will be available!

By Craig Smith

If you have had a property empty for whatever reason, you may know that a property can be exempt from council tax charges for up to 6 months, provided that it is unoccupied and unfurnished. This is known as a Class C exemption.

Under the Localism Act (which has also changed the way in which tenancy deposits are dealt with recently) the Government is planning to allow local authorities to charge almost whatever they like whilst the property is empty. In theory, the council could still allow an empty property to be exempt from the charges but, on the other hand, they could charge the full amount of council during that period.

Bad News for Landlords

Lets just put one thing into perspective here. Yes, sure, the local authorities could earn a little extra cash with the budgets being tighter than ever, but have they thought how this would actually affect homeowners?

It is not always possible for tenants to move out and in on the same day and it is not usually advisable especially if any work was needed between tenancies. A Landlord could find themselves not only out of pocket but in a financial mess if their property was empty for a month or two. Not only would they have no rent coming in to cover the mortgage, insurance etc but they would also have the expense of paying the council tax for a property they don’t even use!

The Knock-On Effect

If your not a Landlord yourself then you might think I’m being biased here but what about the knock-on effect on regular homeowners? For example, an elderly person moving into a care home might leave their home empty whilst they sell it, another expense to prevent them moving forward with their lives. Or how about someone relocating for work and needs to move away quickly?

And this is a Government that is trying to get the housing market back on an even keel?

Looking at this from the other side, most rental properties would hope to be empty for only a few days between tenancies which would mean that only a small amount of council tax would be due. Now, it is isn’t always easy to contact Landlords, particularly if the Council haven’t got the Landlords home address to address any billing. This would create a whole load of extra work for the Councils to chase outstanding amounts so all that money that could earn from empty properties could all be lost in chasing the debt!

Is This Really a Possibility or Just Scaremongering?

A consultation has already been held and 169 councils voted in favour of the extra charges and only 25 against so it is clearly obvious what the majority want. Unsurprisingly, the majority of Landlords are against the idea and quite rightly too!

I’m sure that this is by no means the last we will hear of this as we trundle towards the inevitability of the ever increasing costs of being a Landlord!

By Craig Smith

If you have had a property empty for whatever reason, you may know that a property can be exempt from council tax charges for up to 6 months, provided that it is unoccupied and unfurnished. This is known as a Class C exemption.

Under the Localism Act (which has also changed the way in which tenancy deposits are dealt with recently) the Government is planning to allow local authorities to charge almost whatever they like whilst the property is empty. In theory, the council could still allow an empty property to be exempt from the charges but, on the other hand, they could charge the full amount of council during that period.

Bad News for Landlords

Lets just put one thing into perspective here. Yes, sure, the local authorities could earn a little extra cash with the budgets being tighter than ever, but have they thought how this would actually affect homeowners?

It is not always possible for tenants to move out and in on the same day and it is not usually advisable especially if any work was needed between tenancies. A Landlord could find themselves not only out of pocket but in a financial mess if their property was empty for a month or two. Not only would they have no rent coming in to cover the mortgage, insurance etc but they would also have the expense of paying the council tax for a property they don’t even use!

The Knock-On Effect

If your not a Landlord yourself then you might think I’m being biased here but what about the knock-on effect on regular homeowners? For example, an elderly person moving into a care home might leave their home empty whilst they sell it, another expense to prevent them moving forward with their lives. Or how about someone relocating for work and needs to move away quickly?

And this is a Government that is trying to get the housing market back on an even keel?

Looking at this from the other side, most rental properties would hope to be empty for only a few days between tenancies which would mean that only a small amount of council tax would be due. Now, it is isn’t always easy to contact Landlords, particularly if the Council haven’t got the Landlords home address to address any billing. This would create a whole load of extra work for the Councils to chase outstanding amounts so all that money that could earn from empty properties could all be lost in chasing the debt!

Is This Really a Possibility or Just Scaremongering?

A consultation has already been held and 169 councils voted in favour of the extra charges and only 25 against so it is clearly obvious what the majority want. Unsurprisingly, the majority of Landlords are against the idea and quite rightly too!

I’m sure that this is by no means the last we will hear of this as we trundle towards the inevitability of the ever increasing costs of being a Landlord!