Monthly Archives: September 2012

You are browsing the site archives by month.

By Steve Roulstone

Today’s subject has been a thorny one for Tenants as long as I have been a Letting Agent and longer. Problems that occur within houses if not reported can make far more damage than if reported without delay once it has been noted. The issue is who’s responsibility is the additional damage caused and who is liable for any costs in putting the situation right.

Old cases.

There are many that I could quote but I suppose the first time this happened is the one that I remember the best. This was a leak from a bathroom and the subsequent damage to a kitchen ceiling. The problem was water tracking around the side of a shower curtain and slowly soaking the plaster above the kitchen until a whole section fell off.

Tenant view.

The Tenant view was that the fault was with the shower curtain and that she could not be held responsible for the damage caused. Our view was that both the fact that it was obvious that water was finding its way through and the additional damage caused by failing to report the matter were both the responsibility of the Tenant. Just because something does not work correctly, does not mean you should keep using it ignoring the consequences.

Coverall.

Of course your agreement should ensure that it is quite clear that if secondary damage is caused under these circumstances then the cost is down to the Tenant for failing to address the issue (report it) then half of the battle is won, but we must not forget that we now have the arbitration system if Tenants disagree and I can confirm that the system has always supported us in such cases when claim has had to be made.

Long process.

Of course the knowledge that we should be proven right is not the whole and not what we rely upon, because in the first instance somebody has to pay for the remedial work and as we have found on numerous occasions, a system that does not allow for immediate resolution can annoy those who have to pay for works that they should not have to do so, and wait until a Tenant vacates before the money can be re-cooped.

Getting it right from the start.

This is why good Agents will endeavour to get resolution at the time of the incident and why Tenants may find themselves involved in lengthy discussions that they feel are invasive at the time. But as Property Managers, Agents cannot just ignore the situation.

Current case.

What bought the issue to mind is a Company let, where secondary damage is quiet severe, as a known leek from a cistern, instead of being reported, was contained in a small bowl and repeatedly emptied. The inevitable happened and the bowl was forgotten along it seems with the leak. The subsequent damage is a ruined carpet and underlay, damp walls to well over a meter high and ruined plasterwork and of course the decoration. Apart from anything else, having now dealt with the leak (The only bit the Landlord is responsible for) we now will have to wait several weeks, with the aid of a de-humidifier, before the repair work can be undertaken.

Conclusion.

This case will of course mean several difficult conversations and meetings but that is what we must do to protect the Landlord but as a clearer case I trust you can understand why the damage should not be at the Landlords expense and also understand why the Landlord should not have to stand out of pocket for works which are liable to cost anything up to £500 to repair.

By Steve Roulstone

There is an article in this week’s Property Drum on page 8 that has caught my eye as one of the chain of Letting Agents who have had to address issues in Scotland have commented upon the Shelter campaign surrounding the removal of Tenant fees. I would have to say I agree with  some of what they say, but I disagree with the main thrust of their argument.

Explaining the group.

First, to place some context behind what I wish to say about the subject, I need to explain where the difference lays between Martin & Co offices and Castle Estates offices, because we both have a Franchising background, but now Castle Estates is an independent group who share the same name, but operate entirely independently of each other and have no central controlling Head Office. Martin & Co remain a Franchising organisation where centre influence and dictate the policy of the group.

Comments are my own.

 Therefore I am commenting as an Independent Castle Estates in Staffordshire and not as the Head of an organisation in the same light as Sue Hopson, head of standards at Martin & Co is doing. As far as Castle Estates offices are concerned, if they operate in a manner I disagree with, then they are also the target of my comments.

Agreement.

Firstly I must say that the whole idea of dropping Tenant fees altogether as is the case in Scotland does not just move costs from the Tenant to the Landlord, for just as sure as Landlords will have to pay for the costs generated, these costs will be offset by increases in rent. Then, as has always been the case, market forces will drive rent levels to their correct rate. But they will start from and therefore remain at a higher level.

Major factor missed.

What the comments miss are the manner in which many Agents and I am not referring to anybody specifically when I say this, reduce Landlord fees and raise Tenant fees so they can market themselves as a cheap Agent in to Landlords in the first place! This is a short sighted policy and will surely attract the attention of such groups as Shelter and the CAB who have been looking at Tenants fees for well over ten years.

Bad practise.

In a market where the number of offices offering Letting services has probably doubled in the last three years as Estate Agents flooded to the Lettings Industry for financial reasons, the opportunity to advertise services to Landlords at low prices at the expense of the Tenants has seemed to much of an opportunity to miss for some. But the short sightedness of such an approach should Tenant fees be scrapped in England will need to be explained to Landlords and of course all of us will have to do this, not just those who overcharge.

Long term practise.

It is also a fact that high Tenant fees are nothing new and I have no problem in pointing the finger at Estate Agents who historically have been the main protagonists of this practise. Do I have Tenant fees? Yes, but they have hardly changed in over twelve years and I am happy to justify them, as I have done before now, to any Tenant coming through our system.

Inevitable?

Unless our Industry receives the backing of the Government in driving through legislation to ensure professional standards are upheld by all Letting Agencies, or they can no longer operate, then I believe the day will come when Tenant charges are dropped altogether justified or not, because those with this objective will always be able to point at practises that take advantage of Tenants where fees are concerned. But equally, as I have pointed out that from my own perspective I speak for my own office only, anybody else speaking on the subject should not ignore the current practise of high charges and should be able to ensure that offices under their control can justify what they charge Tenants as well!

By Steve Roulstone

I have stated before that one of the major problems with legislation that is policed by Councils is the amount of effort placed upon seeking out Landlords and Agents that ignore the law. This applies to Houses of Multiple Occupation, Fit and proper accommodation, Tenant deposits and in the case to hand today, Gas Safety certificates.

Local Council request.

In this instance a Landlord who was asked to provide copies of Gas Safety certificates for two properties in Staffordshire by her local Council and having failed to do so was referred to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). It is they that then pursued the matter, but it is good to see a Council taking a pro-active stance in ensuring property is properly maintained.

Legal requirement.

Just to confirm, for those without Gas in a property, the Gas Safety certificate is needed each year to ensure the equipment is working correctly and is safe to use (carbon monoxide gases)

No excuse!

The end result was a fine of £4709 including costs for a £65 job! There can be no excuse for not complying, especially as this Landlord ignored the requests for many months. This also included being given time to produce a certificate by the HSE within a month of notices issued.

Landlord needed convincing.

It does however strike me that by having gone through a procedure with the Local Council and then being given time by the HSE to comply, perhaps the problem lay not in what should have been done, but that the Landlord just did not believe prosecution would actually take place! It looks as though the whole affair took well over a year before any prosecution actually took place!

Contradiction in effect.

This is where action needs to be seen to take place quicker, because if the Law requires a Certificate to be renewed every year, then in a scenario where a certificate does not exist in the first place, to take a year to bring a case to court (assuming that one does now exist?) then the appliances concerned could have been unsafe for anything up to two years!

Does not add up!

Now forgive me for playing the cynic and far be it from me to suggest the Law is not correct, I would not dream of risking not having a property covered for a week, never mind a year, but to take a whole year to bring the case to conclusion for a Law that requires annual checks somewhat makes a mockery of the legislation that demands the check in the first place. Surely by delaying instant action, you are ignoring the supposed risk the Tenants are suffering?

 

By Steve Roulstone

A few weeks ago I wrote that Residential Insulation which is currently being promoted through the Governments Carbon Emission Reduction Traget CERT and the possibility of Landlords being able to claim for expenditure against annual costs, was very difficult to explain to current Landlords and Tenants when the Industry itself had no way of communicating its message.

VNR Contracting Services

I am pleased to confirm that I have now found a Company who is not only being proactive in speaking and working with other organisations, but that understood what we are trying to do, but is also happy to put leg work in themselves in achieving a result.

Landlord and Tenant Choices

What we need to know is that as Property Managers, we can rely upon a Company who specialise in the Insulation field to explain clearly the benefits of having Insulation fitted and the grants that are currently available for Landlord and Tenant alike, one through direct costs and one through the tax incentive currently being offered.

Action Plan

This means we will be able to write to our Tenants and Landlords alike with information relevant to them and then allow the Company to follow up with visits to answer questions and quote for the work direct ensuring that our Tenants and Landlords are able to take advantage of the schemes before winter this year, if they choose to get involved.

Service Provided

To us, this is part of what we should be doing as Property Managers on behalf of all of our clients, not for any other reason than from a central point we are in a position to receive information as Companies approach us and distribute the same to a wide audience. It is not for us to dictate what decisions are made or even recommend what options are pursued, rather to place the information in front of those who have the right to take advantage of the grants etc that become available.

Reliable Contractor

What is reassuring now is that having struggled to find a Contractor to work with, we have been approached by one who already works with local Councils and as such carries a pedigree that is re-assuring. I am happy to recommend VNR Contracting Services Ltd and in reality that is only the second recommendations we have made in over two years of writing!

By Steve Roulstone

As part of our good practises when reviewing our methods of operation, between us we always discuss what Landlords ask about and speak about when we visits them to give a valuation and review of their property. It is important for us to be aware of any new trends and old ones and surprisingly, one trend that does not change is that Landlords are still discussing and talking about ‘Nightmare Tenant’ stories and what is done to stop them occurring.

Changed Market.

The market has changed considerably and I am sure will keep evolving over the next ten years. Certainly technology and mobile phones have meant we have to make information available quickly and accessible. Standard of housing has improved as competition for Tenants continues to grow and more and more properties enter the market. Yet the one thing that will not go away is the stories of Tenants trashing houses and the fear that brings with it.

Not common.

Yet certainly as far as I can comment on the houses we have been involved with, this is something that rarely happens now and I cannot remember the last time we had a property that was badly damaged by the Tenants.  We, like all Agents, get Tenants that do not care for property in the way that both our Landlords and we would prefer, but this is always a case of standards rather than actual physical damage done.

Strange beliefs.

There are also plenty of situations where what should be done and what the Tenants actually believe needs to be done differ, such as the Tenant who stated they did not need to clean one bedroom, because they had never used it during the Tenancy. Or the person who broke a window when mowing the lawn and said the Landlord had to be responsible because the lawn from where the stone came was the Landlords and not hers!

Manage to avoid.

The answer for me is to catch problems early and make sure the Tenant knows both their responsibility and our role as Agents in what you are trying to achieve together. In short, good Management will ensure damage limitation. But what this does prove is that some cases must still happen and that bad stories are the ones most Landlords hear first, or perhaps take note of!

Practical experience.

In the middle of writing this Blog, I have visited a new Landlord at their property, student accommodation it may have been, but she described the manner in which the last Agents had allowed the students to live last year. Not a property wrecked, as I have stated, more a question of standards. But it does rather prove my point. Whether self Managing or appointing an Agent, make sure that visits take place and that problems are resolved head on and not left to fester. Perhaps then we may allay Landlords fears by reducing further tales of the ‘Horror Tenants’

By Craig Smith

Over the summer and early in September we always have a number of enquiries for student properties. Once the university acceptance has come through the next hurdle on the way to further education is finding suitable accommodation. The key thing to remember is not how many bedrooms the property needs to have (a 2 bed terrace will probably be no good for 4 sharing people!) or even how close it is to a university but rather if it is suitable for the tenancy.

Some Landlord Prefer No Sharers

Most Landlords, certainly from our experience, prefer not to accept sharers in general. Perhaps two friends or colleagues looking to share to save on living costs would be OK but not usually more than that. The problem is so many bad experiences that Landlords have had where properties haven’t been kept in the best condition by sharing tenants.

We have had some instances where the ‘blame game’ is played. Maybe a rota has been set up to tell who should do which job and when but not everybody sticks to it. Tenants sometimes forget that if they are all named on one tenancy agreement then they are all jointly liable for any damages or outstanding rent. This means that all of the tenants are able to use all of the property.

Specifically Designed Sharing Properties

The same problem can occur when each tenant has an individual tenancy agreement but still has use of some communal areas. For example, renting a single room with a shared kitchen and bathroom. Each room is the responsibility of the individual tenant but the shared areas can remain a grey subject.

We had one instance recently where a particular tenant denied leaving the shared kitchen in a mess after use. Quite a coincidence then that as soon as this particular tenant vacated the condition of the property has improved!

Students Renting Issues

The main issue that some Landlords have with students is not the lack of rent payment. Most rents are paid in advance with thanks to student loans or the bank of Mum & Dad. There is a common stereotype of a student being a wild, partying lout who will trash the property without a care in the world. Of course, this isn’t the case but looking at other situations before, it only takes one bad experience for a Landlord to be put off.

Student Specific Properties

Most properties are subject to HMO Regulations (Homes in Multiple Occupancy) which means that it needs to have up to date safety equipment, signs etc if it is to be let to sharers. There are other properties that are designed just for student accommodation which may already meet the necessary requirements. This is also something that you should look out for if you are looking for a rental property and yet another reason why sometimes going through an agency is best!

 

By Steve Roulstone

Like all good Letting Agents, we carry out property visits to ensure that our Tenants are looking after the home and living in line with their Tenancy agreement. We are used to looking for evidence of unofficial Tenants, would easily spot any Tenant growing cannabis, but have found a property we manage used for the storage of drugs and that has proven to discover what the house is being used for in these circumstances is a big challenge.

First indication.

The first we knew of a problem at the house was a phone call from the local CID advising us they had suspicions concerning activity of a house in a quiet country location. This was both a heads up but also a request to allow them to go about their business following a raid at the property. They later confirmed that drugs and a large amount of money had been found and seized from the house.

Information.

This was followed up with a visit to our offices where they gathered information about the Tenant, rent payments and our knowledge of what was happening at the property. We were able to supply information which we believe was of use and hand over keys to avoid any further damage and ensure the house was securely locked.

Property inspection.

A week later, with the knowledge that little damage had been caused and confirmation from the police that the house had not been abused and was in good order, we were able to visit the property and officially check out the Tenant at their request and see for ourselves just how the drugs had been stored.

Fridge Freezers.  

Now forgive me, but I have no knowledge of how and where drugs can be stored, but as soon as we opened the fridge and freezer doors, it became evident just what the appliances had been used for. The issue for us was that we had been to carry out a property visit some two months prior and because the house was being looked after and all was clean, as you would expect, we had no indication of the problem. Because the appliances belonged to the Tenant, we would also have no intention of looking in the fridges to check how they were being used. But as soon as we opened them now, even though they had long been emptied, the smell was overpowering!

Systems.

This situation, which is subject of a review of our practises as I write this, is a warning for us all. We have no right to open fridges, washing machines, cupboards and draws or look in boxes, cases or even envelopes that are the property of the Tenant and nobody would expect us to. Cooker yes, because that is always the property of the Landlord, but we need to be aware of the possibility, for if nothing else, this incident has, to say the least, sharpened our focus.

Aftermath.

 Thankfully, the Tenant who is obviously the subject of ongoing Police enquiries (about which this is not the place to comment) was most co-operative and the property will be marketed again without delay. What we must do is build safeguards in to our system, without over-reacting to what has happened, that will ensure we keep our eyes open at all times to possible signs and the Police have been most helpful in discussing the matter with us. What it has proven though, is that ensuring a house is used for its correct permitted usage, remains as difficult as ever!

By Steve Roulstone

A few weeks ago I wrote that Residential Insulation which is currently being promoted through the Governments Carbon Emission Reduction Traget CERT and the possibility of Landlords being able to claim for expenditure against annual costs, was very difficult to explain to current Landlords and Tenants when the Industry itself had no way of communicating its message.

VNR Contracting Services.

I am pleased to confirm that I have now found a Company who is not only being proactive in speaking and working with other organisations, but that understood what we are trying to do, but is also happy to put leg work in themselves in achieving a result.

Landlord and Tenant choices.

What we need to know is that as Property Managers, we can rely upon a Company who specialise in the Insulation field to explain clearly the benefits of having Insulation fitted and the grants that are currently available for Landlord and Tenant alike, one through direct costs and one through the tax incentive currently being offered.

Action plan.

This means we will be able to write to our Tenants and Landlords alike with information relevant to them and then allow the Company to follow up with visits to answer questions and quote for the work direct ensuring that our Tenants and Landlords are able to take advantage of the schemes before winter this year, if they choose to get involved.

Service provided.

To us, this is part of what we should be doing as Property Managers on behalf of all of our clients, not for any other reason than from a central point we are in a position to receive information as Companies approach us and distribute the same to a wide audience. It is not for us to dictate what decisions are made or even recommend what options are pursued, rather to place the information in front of those who have the right to take advantage of the grants etc that become available.

Reliable Contractor.

What is reassuring now is that having struggled to find a Contractor to work with, we have been approached by one who already works with local Councils and as such carries a pedigree that is re-assuring. I am happy to recommend VNR Contracting Services Ltd and in reality that is only the second recommendations we have made in over two years of writing!

By Steve Roulstone

It is possibly one of the most depressing and sickening things that can happen to a property owner, to find that squatters have broken in to your property and that the law does not support this effective breaking and entering in any way and the responsibility to deal with the intrusion is thrown squarely on the shoulders of the rightful owner. These words, whilst repeated as I remember them, were used during a presentation to the Lettings Industry during a speech on the use of empty housing some ten years ago.

At last!

Now, after so many years the Government has reacted and made it an illegal offense to squat in premises without a legal right or reason to be present. What should have happened then is the unfortunate property owners who were suffering at present be given their voice and an outcry of at last should have been heard. What was heard was a cry of ‘unfair’ as housing groups and charities warned of rising homelessness.

Responsibility.

Now I must make myself clear here, I am not uncaring of the position people are in that sees them squat in the first place or the problems they now face if removed from property. My problem is that the house owner should have always been in the position of being able to rely upon the assistance of the law and it is unfair to somehow shift the responsibility back on the shoulders of the owners. This is clearly a failing of the social system in providing housing for all in the first place. This is said with full knowledge that there are some who will always remain outside of the system and be non-conformist!

Ignoring the Law.

I have always found it somewhat ironic that the Houses of Multiple Occupation laws were introduced to tackle safety in high rise City Centre properties and for ignoring them Landlords could be banned from owning property. Squatters, by the very nature of what they do, cause far more danger and would never consider such legislation in how they live, yet they are protected because their activity has always fallen under civil offense legislation and not an illegal act. To make it so at last corrects this ridiculous state of affairs.

Financial requirement.

What is so often forgotten is the financial requirement that the owner needs to fulfil and the difficulties they find themselves left in when a property is a target for squatters. In my small way, I feel I need to make a stand for the owners, and no matter how many stories there are of squatters who have maintained a property well, there are just as many of properties left in an appalling condition.

Enforcement.

Now we must hope that this blight (although mainly a City centre problem) is dealt with in short order. It is a fairly simple statement for me to make, because no matter what your feelings, we should live by the letter of the law and I believe ownership rights should be amongst those at the top of the list of laws to abide by. My hope is that the charities and groups working with those made homeless by this change of law do not fund any legal challenge through the courts. Owners, who are not all £multimillion Companies who can afford losses, deserve the law to be enforced in full.

By Steve Roulstone

I am not a lover of utility suppliers, mainly because they never seem to know how our Industry works and prove time and again, that they do not have a system that can deal with people moving on a frequent basis. I have seen STWA send out invoices for a few days between Tenants at three times the rate of the normal daily cost, heard staff at British Gas say “let’s turn the fax of today, we have enough paperwork to deal with” and famously (for me) told British Gas, “sorry if I have not pressed the right option, there isn’t one for ‘we do not know what we are doing’ ”

Visit out of the blue.

This time however, they have gone too far! An engineer turned up at a house we manage last week to change the meter because the Tenants were stated as not having paid the Gas Bill. Unbelievably that simple fact was wrong, as the Gas Bill had been paid and was up to date. But that did not stop the BG Employee changing the Tenants on to a pay as you go meter and also whilst at the property looking at the appliances.

Gas Fire turned off.

Mistake number two. Whilst there, without looking at the operation of the fire, he decided the fire was unsafe, disconnected it and labelled it as unfit for use. The Tenant, understandably, phoned us and asked us to explain why? We sent a qualified engineer round, who confirmed, as he had when he carried out the annual Landlords Gas Inspection less than four months earlier, that the fire was perfectly OK and that there was no need what so ever to turn it off.

Not the first time!

What amazed me about this was that our Gas engineer confirmed that this was not the first time he had heard of this and that the meter people employed by British Gas were not even qualified as Gas Engineers. Rather they were trained to carry out a ‘Visual Inspection’ and it seems on that basis only without any qualified reason; the appliance was labelled as dangerous. Rightly, our Gas engineer has sent his invoice to British Gas, as why should the Landlord pay for the mistake?

Liability.               

Now I know from experience that they are not the purveyors of all things good as they like to be perceived (especially from the TV ads) but you have to ask the question, since when have they been given the role of sending unqualified people in too houses to carry out unsolicited inspections? It frankly beggars belief but they must see themselves as the protectors of all things Gas related in Britain’s houses to go about giving their staff this kind of instruction.

Admission.

Now they have apologised for even getting involved in the first place as the Tenants had as stated paid their Gas Bill and the meter will be changed back again. As to whether they will pay for the engineer’s time to confirm all was well? Knowing British Gas I doubt it, but hey, somebody who matters might just read this and agree they should. Feel free to get in touch!

Motivation.

That just leaves us wondering why they should do this in the first place? I am afraid in my opinion I only have one thought as to why and that is to generate income through the repairs that appear without the ability to check correctly, would have been generated from this incident – why else? Forgive me if I am wrong, but why else should British Gas staff be condemning appliances (even though they are unqualified in the first place) during visits they are not even supposed to be making? If we had not known better, the result could well have been a call to a British Gas engineer to repair the fire and the result of that would have been an invoice.

Summary.

By all means call me cynical, but I believe this would probably have been the outcome of a visit to a property lived in by the house owner and the only reason this did not finish in this manner, is because British Gas would not have expected a third party to have knowledge through the Landlords inspection of the appliances and be able to call upon an engineer as we did. In other words it resulted from British Gas NOT understanding how the rental system works, but then I already know that.

Bad practise British Gas, Bad Practise!