By Steve Roulstone
I have just read an article in one of the Industry magazines as part of my Monday ‘what is happening’ hour and frankly could not believe my eyes. It is in a section called Outsourcing in Mays issue of The Negotiator, so falls half way between an advert and an article, but is based upon the words of two gentlemen from the industry, one being an Agent and one being a facility provider for the industry and it is clear that one has an invested interest in selling his services, but I just find it hard to believe that an Agent would place in writing what has been repeated in the article!
Matter of opinion.
Let me say from the off here, that what I am stating is my opinion or ‘take’ on the subject, so some of what I comment on I do so agreeing that it is a matter of opinion, but I would never admit in writing that as a Company we could not offer our Landlords such an important part of the service needed in Managing property on their behalf. Because the representative of the Agents involved is openly stating that they are unable to provide professional quality inventories for the Landlords they serve!
Inventories are us!
Firstly, the skill set needed to be able to supply top class inventories can be learnt by one man as well as the next, so I cannot agree that Letting Agents cannot carry out the task on their Landlords behalf. All they need to do is learn how! But secondly and again in my opinion more importantly, how can any agent pass on such a vastly important part of the job to somebody else?
Legal responsibility.
Far more importantly for me is the legal responsibility we have with our Landlords under the contract all Agents should supply their Landlords. Good inventories are such an important part of the service now that to charge for a job and only do half of it in my opinion cannot be called ‘Full Management’ services.
Argument against.
The reasons given for encouraging outsourcing inventories, is that Agents are too close to the position and risk Tenants stating the inventory is one sided. Well if what we claim for is correct, then where is the problem? Done correctly, Tenants have as much input as we do in the document and as we are contractually bound to work for the Landlord then that is what we do. They go on to say that there is then an inherent risk that the Agents inventory could fail in any claim because it was raised by the Landlords Agent. Well in our experience, that is just wrong!
Facts speak louder than words.
The facts are that after three years with our current system, where disputes are dealt with by independent arbitrators, as a Company after ensuring we have Landlord agreement we have won every case that has gone through arbitration. So our experience would suggest exactly the opposite than what is claimed in this article. So the facts support that Agents should know what to do and how. I would also suggest, that a third party inventory, has far more chance of having their claim challenged by a Tenant who can easily prove that they were not involved during the Tenancy and are therefore not aware of matters which could have a far greater bearing on the outcome of any claim.
Summary.
Sub contracting major parts of the role of Property Management is not and never should be the way forward and our industry is not alone in being able to challenge the principal. The inventory is such an integral part of being able to offer the services of Property Management to Landlords that I would challenge any Companies ability to call themselves’ Letting Agents if they openly state they are unable to fulfil the role themselves. What else? Rent Collection? Property Visits? The agreement? Better to be able to say yes, we do that!
Recent Comments