Category Archives: Uncategorized

By Steve Roulstone

Immigration

Government scale down legality checks.

 In another climb down the Government took a massive step backwards last weekend from asking Landlords to ensure all Tenants are legally present in the Country. It is being reported that concerns over the risks surrounding too much red tape being introduced are responsible and that it will only be introduced in areas that can be highlighted as currently causing concern, such as some boroughs of West London.

 Once again I have to point out that the debate about the requirement and what the impact of asking Landlords to be responsible misses out upon, is that professional referencing already supply confirmation through the provision of a National Insurance Number and specific right to work permits. This tells me quite clearly that Landlords that would wish to know before allowing occupation already have the ability to do so.

 It would therefore be correct in my opinion to ensure those who already carry out such checks should not be drawn in too yet another hoop to jump through, because work and income would already be confirmed. Therefore those who do not check rely upon income from other sources, such as benefit payments or the black market.

 Whilst I would agree that such Landlords are taking advantage of ‘street’ circumstances, it strikes me that the authorities need to turn their attention to the very areas (Benefit fraud and the Black economy) where methods of policing and prosecuting miscreants’ already exist. Certainly when set against piling yet more requirements upon the Rental Industry, where no policing exists for either these schemes or indeed for much of the myriad of legislation that has already been introduced over the last few years, such as HMO’s and Tenants Deposit schemes.

 So legislation is discussed, promised, withdrawn (and according to some reports been the cause of the Prime Minister turning “puce” when advised of the withdrawal) without involving the industry or the specialists who administer the professional bodies. It seems that lessons are just never learnt that the people who know best how the industry works are the very ones who administer it from within. All that has to happen is for somebody to ask!

By Steve Roulstone

Inventory

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!

By Steve Roulstone

New portal

Reports over the weekend confirm a story I heard not two months ago, that a serious contender to Rightmove and in a lesser way Zoopla, is about to be launched on the market. Recent price increases on the amount charged for portals have been discussed at length within the Industry and have mainly been as the result of Rightmoves belief that as the leading market provider, they can increase costs at will. I may be wrong, but see no increased level of services for increasing levels of invoices?

 

Right to reply.

This is a course of action that rightly in my opinion generates responses and in this case we seem to have had a response, which, if successful, will severely dent Rightmoves position as market leader. I will not comment on the scheme in general because we have very little detail as yet and until we do I would prefer to keep my powder dry.

 

However!

What is worthy of comment and the detail that caught my eye when reading a report on the plans on a property press web site was the initial statement that Agents joining the site would be asked to do so by only utilising the services of one other portal. It seems strange that having stated detail would follow, that such a major requirement should be the only rule released? Unless of course it was released to test the water!

 

Expected reaction.

If that is the case, the reaction seems to be as expected, that people like to choose for themselves who they do or do not wish to run with. If not, then hopefully notice will be taken of the reaction received because it flies in the face of one of the very principals the new site would be battling against in clearly setting itself up as a competitor with Rightmove.

 

Visit the reasons.

Please take on board Agents Mutual that you have set yourselves up as an alternative to Rightmove, not only because of prices, but also because of the manner in which they treat their customers. The feeling that we are dictated to by Rightmove, as a customer of theirs, has increased on many levels over the last few years and is in my opinion, a major influence on our perception of them as a Company.

 

Right to choose.

This is why, when given the right to choose a viable alternative, a large sector of the industry may well do just that. But by telling us in effect, who we can and cannot trade with, is acting in a manner no different to Rightmove in the first place. It is very clear as to why the need for such a rule to be in place is felt to be important to its success. But I would ask those involved to re-consider? Surely a better motivation to potential customers can be found than one that tells its customers how to go about their business?

 

Landlords that matter.

It must not be forgotten that we exist to provide a service to our Landlords, in doing so we should give best advice at all times. It cannot be in the Landlords interest for Agents to withdraw services from a provider because of a principal of business which may in the long run serve to improve what we offer, but will change little from our customer’s perception. Better the providers work on offering a better service which we need to follow, the principal remains the same, but Landlords do not suffer along the way!

By Craig Smith

2 Property Insurance 240513

In our local newspaper this week there was a story of a family who had been awoken in the early morning hours by a fire that had started in their kitchen. Thankfully, everyone escaped unhurt and it was the kitchen that suffered most of the damage. The story itself highlights two important issues not just for homeowners but also to those in rental properties as well.

Insurance

The first is that the lady in question did not have any insurance to cover the damage caused by the fire. There are a lot of people tightening their purse strings due to the way the economy is at the moment but we cant be sure whether this is the reason in this instance. The costs of food, fuel and energy have all increased no end over the last few years so it is no wonder some people look to cut costs elsewhere.

Insurance is never an area we would recommend scrimping on as, like it has here, it can backfire dramatically. The kitchen will probably need ripping out and a complete new one going in, which is most likely to be a cost of four figures at least! Compare this to the cost of the insurance and it is easy to make a decision as to whether the insurance is worth it.

It is easy to find the right policy you need especially with the help of internet comparison sites and brokers. It is usually the responsibility of the owner or Landlord to ensure the building is covered and the tenant to cover any accidental damage.

Electrical Safety

The fire itself was started by an electric can opener that had been left switched on at the plug. This highlights the second issue of the day.

Although it may be more convenient to leave electrical goods left turned on, the fire brigade and other safety experts recommend turning them off to prevent the likelihood of fires such as this. It is also a reminder that appliances, plugs and leads should be checked for any wear, frayed edges of potential hazards. Again, we don’t know the reason why the can opener had become faulty but couple an unsafe item with lack of insurance and it could spell disaster!

Other Important Safety Factors

Lets not forget that each property should have a working smoke alarm. We still hear of so many people who have the viewpoint that it will never happen to them but it could happen to anyone! Just last year there was a fire in a property that we manage, caused by a faulty kettle of all things! It was only the fact that the smoke alarms were working correctly that the tenant was alerted so quickly, preventing the fire from getting out of hand and keeping the damage to a minimum.

By Steve Roulstone

r_seaman@hotmail.com

 

Many have commented on the Queens speech and it will come as no surprise that it is the element included in the forthcoming immigration bill that I now make the subject of my latest Blog.

Content.

Much has been said about the lack of detail contained within the speech and most will see this as a hastily included promise, aimed mainly at the ears of those who chose to support UKIP at the recent local elections. I believe they would probably be correct to do so! I do not wish to comment on the political rights or wrongs of this situation, but there is no doubt the clamour to make political gain from the lack of detail have themselves repeated the same lack of detail in what they have written.

A R L A

Rather, what detail is known, confirms that anybody writing without including how the current checking systems work in our Industry are showing themselves to be short on knowledge and it would appear, purely intent on causing embarrassment to the Government or making some kind of gain themselves. The best report and summary of where we actually are with what has been suggested against how the Industry deals with references now, comes from A R L A who have summarised very simply the reality of what is being suggested.

In the know!

What happens within the vast majority of Agencies in the UK is that professional referencing is carried out by professional referencing agencies, which include taking the potential Tenants National Security Number which assists in confirming identity and employment records. In effect, we are already able to confirm very easily the status of all applicants, meaning the check is already being carried out and is therefore available for any Landlord who wishes to avail themselves of the services most Letting Agents offer.

In the know but not known!

It is the Landlords who take advantage of the system to accept Tenants without ensuring such checks are carried out that are being addressed by this potential legislation. This point is missed by nearly all reports as the writers pursue their own cause through print. It is therefore hardly a blind leap, to see just how easy it would be too introduce the same tests carried out for others, to the few who have created the apparent need for action to be taken.

Sensible reaction.

Mine is a small point but relevant none the less and I just hope that the promise not to introduce yet another hurdle for the vast majority of honest good Landlords to jump, is upheld, especially when all Landlords who utilise our system for example are in effect already complying. Now for those who read my ramblings regularly, I am reaching for the cupboard and reaching for the drum!

Professional.

What I do not agree with, is yet again it seems the clear and once and for all legislation required to turn the industry into a professional service is being sidestepped. Whether it is via licensed Agents or registered Landlords, the solution lies with the Government that has the strength to research and legislate in an organised and industry sponsored manner. Every professional body would work alongside a Government to produce what would deal with all of these side issues in one step and give the public the comfort and trust all professional Agents and Landlords justifiably feel they already deserve.