Tag Archives: Current News

14Jun 2012

Current Property News: Rental sector attacked for no reason – again!

⋅ 1 Comment

By Steve Roulstone

Once again I find myself reading a report condemning the rental sector, this time  as the background to the thrust of the actual article, which is about increasing trends in the rental sector. The reason given is financial insecurity which should come as no surprise to anybody, but the article takes the unreasonable opportunity to condemn the rental sector without providing any evidence for the statements made.

Hidden reasons.

Of course the reason why is to suggest that the Government (this is after all a left wing paper)  are forcing families down a road to unsettled and poor condition housing, when in reality, and I can only comment from what I know about, the truth is nothing like the picture painted and indication given within the report.

Bad Housing, Bad Landlords and High rents.

As a professional letting Agency, we will only take on property that is to standard and when allowed upgrade property as required. I say when allowed because only this morning I have been discussing a Tenant who will not allow access to make alterations which will vastly improve a bathroom. Equally, we always and ONLY advise Landlords of the correct path and procedures surrounding the property and their Tenants. Also, rents in Staffordshire are not rising and Tenants are benefitting from the number of properties on the market by making offers.

Source of information.

Because of this and with the knowledge that not every property or Landlord is perfect and therefore accepting that problems do exist, I would suggest that like most of what facts are listed in the article, it is the London market that is the source of the information. But it would be so much better if either the article were split into two, sticking to the point made as the reason for the increase and giving the chance for the detail behind these damning statements about the rental market instead of providing no evidence what so ever!   

Professionalism.

I would agree however, as I have stated on oh so many occasions before, that the intended route the previous Government was intending to take, to ensure all agents were approved, is still the best possible route for the Industry. For if this is still a major problem, and as I have sated I can only comment on my local market, then the Industry itself, having launched ‘Safe Agent’ cannot be blamed for doing nothing to improve standards. The problem still seems to be in the Self Managed Landlord or the Agent who ignores all professional bodies and here all Tenants have a clear choice! Ask which bodies the agent belongs to that will protect them!

Legislation.

One of the first issues that I cannot agree with is that of legislation, because if ever an industry has been targeted it is the rental industry, with every facet of what we do coming under the legislative microscope for the last few years. The comment about deposits for example is a ‘throw away comment’ which cannot be supported, because any Tenant who suffers at the hand of an Agent or Landlord who does not use the Deposit legislation can be heavily fined and the Tenant has a clear route to take.

Tenant problems.

Of course what this could refer to is the number of Tenants who have found themselves loosing when being processed through the Deposit legislation, because although most do win because of badly prepared defences by the Landlord or Agent, I know as a fact, that if the Tenant looses when going through arbitration, they still blame the Agent and talk about the cost as if they have been treated unfairly. This of course is not the case, but as the article gives no background to the statements made we will never know!

Figures.

But one bit of background I can supply is that the percentage of people renting privately has been increasing for years and particularly so over the last two years. I asked the Department of the Communities only last week if the overall privately rented % for 2011 was yet available and it is not, but I expect it to reach 20%, a rise of nearly 5% in the last two years. Therefore to state it may be 36% by 2025 (which let’s not forget is still over 12 years away) when twelve years ago it was at 9% would reflect a rate of increase through good AND bad times that at current trends will stand at 31% anyway!

Bad Journalism.

So I am afraid that overall I label this article as bad journalism, trying to score a political point without any confirmation of the statements made attacking an industry which is not represented and quoting figures, which, when you are aware of the background, are really not that surprising. But it does touch on one major factor. Unless the availability of mortgages for Buy to Let Landlords is improved, the supply of rented property will quite possibly dry up! But where I will concur, is that by failing to introduce Licensed Agents and Landlords, the standard of the current source of rented stock, namely properties that fail to sell could well continue to suffer. For without legislation, as we all know, when finances are strained, shortcuts are taken!

24May 2012

Current Property News: EPC Clarification? – Hardly!

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

Last week I spoke about the confusion surrounding the introduction of the new legislation surrounding the supply of EPC’s to potential Tenants and how they need to be displayed when advertising properties in both the media and standard window displays. This week we have achieved some clarity through this link to a Q&A paper supplied by the NFPP.

Display documents.

Thankfully, it confirms that window display do not need to have the EPC displayed, which would as a stated, have meant whole scale changes throughout. In fact the clarification does make sense and now every time we give the same property documents as displayed actually out upon request, a copy of the first page of the EPC will be attached. Internet documents have always been clear and a copy needs to be available via a link for every property displayed.

Remaining question.

One area still remains unanswered and this is mainly because the Trading Standards Office (TSO) have as yet failed to contact me to confirm how they view electronic window displays, such as a TV with a scrolling image. As the TSO are the agency charged with enforcing the regulations and the body who will issue fines for non compliance, they will be the body I will seek confirmation from, but hopefully common sense will again prevail and the term ‘window display’ will win over ‘electronic display’ when they confirm an answer as it is the difference between the two definitions that is causing the remaining confusion.

Remaining confusion.

However, one area of the new regulations is still causing confusion and that is whether an EPC in the new format is required even if the existing one is still within its ten year time frame. At present each EPC for a rented property does have a ten year life, but the new regulations ask for certain pieces of information, as displayed on page one of the new style certificates to be included, but this information is not on page one of the old style certificates.

Legal view.

 The legal view is that to comply with the legislation, a new certificate has to be supplied, otherwise how can we provide the information as needed on page one of the new style certificates. Bearing in mind the regulations actually confirms the data as listed on page 1 of the new certificates.

Industry view.

Surprisingly, the view of the industry (at least locally) is that a new certificate is NOT required, and that the old style, even though it does not include the data referred to on page 1, is sufficient. Surprisingly because one would assume they would take the line of least resistance and of course, increased revenue!

Still waiting.

Having now been waiting for over a week for TSO to phone me back, had a row with my legal advisor because he cannot see the commercial sense with which I will be putting my Company at a disadvantage if I only took his view locally and had to insist that my current EPC provider asks again specifically about the issue of providing the data as specified when he has already responded to my question, means I am winning no friends in trying to resolve the issue, but as it is my Company that would be fined if we get it wrong, I must be persistent. But the worst comment that has come out of this shambles and I firmly believe that it is a shambles, is that there is no definitive answer, and only the courts could provide one! Perhaps I should just ignore the law then unless my Company is successfully prosecuted? It just makes further nonsense all round!

22May 2012

Property Landlord advice: Defining Landlord Insurance and matters arising.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone.

Over the last three weeks, different issues have arisen concerning Insurance, all of which are worthy of note but not to the stage where they warrant their own blog, but they are important enough in  my opinion to be explained especially as for Landlords who are trying to deal with Insurance when renting your home, they do cause both concern and confusion.

Clarification.

There are two TV adverts that at present need clarifying, the first being the advert for Direct Line, where they mention Landlords Insurance. The reason this causes confusion and I have already had several Landlords who now believe that what Direct Line offer is a new product that they must also take, is that as an Industry, Landlords Insurance means ‘Rent and Legal Expenses’ cover. What the advert is talking about is Buildings Insurance which is for Landlords, by no means a special product, as the Insurance Companies that specialise in the Industry have been around as long as the Industry has.

Landlord spy.

The second advert, also by Direct Line, flies so much in the face of the principals which are enshrined in the law surrounding renting of property, namely ‘Peaceable Occupation’ that it is laughable. This is the one with the Landlord with a pair of binoculars. Worst than suggesting that either a Landlord would do such a thing, or that such behaviour is reasonable, is that the Tenant is shown hiding as if guilty! It is of course supposed to be a spoof, but not one that this Letting Agent sees the funny side of!

Small Print.

More important than the above which are at the best misleading, are the two real time cases that have affected Landlords of our own concerning their own Buildings Insurance cover. The first is the small print surrounding what a particular Insurance Company included insisted upon as acceptable by way of requirements for any Tenant. It was the first time we had come across this and we discovered purely because a member of our staff was very thorough in checking the Landlords documents, but in short, they insisted upon minimum earnings and hours of work per week. This opens a whole new area of concern for all Landlords, but at least we can advice all we speak to of the risk!

Reaction Time.

Secondly was a flood suffered during the recent cold spell, not by frozen pipes but by the failure of a valve. The damage, which happened between Tenants when the property was empty, also affected next door, but the reaction time in getting the property surveyed and starting to both dry out and repair, was in our opinion, the worst we have ever seen. It is difficult to know how to avoid this happening again, but I certainly feel that when looking at the cheaper end of Insurance cover, before a policy is taken with, shall we say an unusual supplier? Then ensure you have at least one reference, because we feel this Landlord has lost at least two months’ rent, which is more than the original cost of the Insurance!

Conclusion

Well the only one that springs to mind is that Insurance is a field that is going to continue to supply topics of conversation. Given the current FSA regulations, it is also one that fewer people can enter in to conversation about professionally, as we are not allowed to recommend Insurance providers ourselves, despite our daily involvement ‘in the field’. This is supposed to protect customers and ensure nobody gains financially from such advice. Perhaps the reality is that this is a short term view and that Companies in our position can actually help! But in my experience what cannot be denied is that the adverts cause more confusion than clarity.

14May 2012

Property Landlord Information: A Guarantor is a Guarantor is a Guarantor!

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

Just when you think you may find it difficult to think of something to find as a topic for the second Blog of the week, actually working day to day in a Lettings office comes up trumps. There is after all always something happening and something to write about but never surprising. The point is that it is nearly always a subject that has cropped up before, quite often from a different angle or from a differing view point, but very rarely is it a subject that is new to our experience, which means we are able to respond correctly and quickly.

When is a Guarantor not a Guarantor.

Today’s topic is one that usually only raises its head when another problem exists in the background, so when the conversation starts with the statement ‘I do not want to be a Guarantor any more’ The first question has to be why and then of course we have to advise the consequences, which, unless a replacement is already lined up, is that the Tenancy is still live and that they are still responsible as Guarantors.

Differing positions.

Of course there are many differing situations, this morning’s was the most common one, one partner has left the house and the Guarantor has found themselves looking after the child’s ex partner. This is usually the worst scenario, as we also have to inform the wounded parent that not only are they still liable, but also their child is still responsible for the rent and of course property  as well, until acceptable alternative arrangements are confirmed.

Best advice.

 Of course we do everything possible to make people aware of their liability before the agreement is entered in too, including a separate fact sheet for the Guarantor which is also signed separately to the agreement. The problem is who reads them? We also prefer the Guarantor to be present at the check-in, where the Tenant who has also been given a copy of the agreement to read prior to moving in, which is also ignored more often than not. The point being  that no matter how much we try and at least some do read the information, so it is worthwhile, a percentage of those that do not end up hearing exactly what they do not want to hear when the question is asked.

Solution.

Well in real terms, i.e. as per the agreement, there is not a solution, rather the Tenants have to abide by notice, if the second party still wants to leave and therefore the Guarantee agreement still stands. However taking a practical stance, providing the Landlord does not loose rent then either a replacement can be found or an alternative Guarantor, but ONLY when either criteria is met and new documents signed is the original agreement replaced and not until. Of course if as stated the second person does not leave or no alternative Guarantor can be found, then there is no change!

Conclusion.

So my original statement stands, because a Guarantor is the Guarantor for the duration of the agreement. Of course such problems, whilst being the bread and butter of such articles as mine, do not happen often and if 95% of Tenancies pass without a hitch, then the same percentage of Guarantors never have to make that phone call! 

 

11May 2012

Current Property News: Castle Blog 2 Year Anniversary.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

 

It may not be news to some, but to me the two year anniversary of my Blog page (This is the 200th Post) marks the changes that both the industry and my Company have gone through during this time. It started as a way of promoting the name of the group at a time when I was both a Franchise holder and Franchisee of the Castle Estates Group. The Anniversary marks a time when the Franchise group has ceased trading and my own Franchise has become an independent Letting Agency, as have all of the National Castle Offices across the country.

 

Changes in trade.

 

On the face of it, such a statement of fact may seem to be a statement of failure, as the group no longer offers Franchising at all. But rather it is a statement about the industry itself, which no longer in my humble opinion suits the Franchising model, in the same way that Estate Agency never has either. The reason is simple, because of the housing sales collapse, nearly every Estate Agents in town has added lettings to their business model and one can hardly blame them, as there is no doubt this saved many Companies from closing during the last three years.

 

Changes in Law.

 

This period has also seen many changes in law as Governments continue to try to put their control on a sector which they obviously felt was not giving Tenants a fair deal. Regular readers will know that I look on our industry as two sectors, the non professional and the professional. Legislation has enveloped all. The only pity is that our professional bodies were not strong enough to convince the Government that they could self Police and until legislation enforces all Agencies to join a professional body this will not change.

 

Changes in rules of the game.

 

Not all legislation has been to do with how the industry treats its clients however and of course there have been many changes involving procedure, which ultimately DO effect how clients are treated, but are more to do with how we carry out our business than the principals used in doing so. Most of these changes have only just taken effect through the Localism Act, such as new regulations surrounding Tenants Deposit and the manner in which the Energy Performance Certificate is dealt with. No doubt we will continue to see more, although without being Political, it tends to be the socialists that encourage control of our every move rather than the current incumbents.

 

Trading as a Letting Agent.

 

So back to the day job! Well that has been the result of the major change during the time this blog has been running and in fact I am pleased to state that this Blog has been one of the more consistent factors in my daily work. It is a task I both enjoy and feel offers a real service to our client base, both Landlord and Tenant. Certain posts now find themselves repeated in our local papers so the presence of the Blog has more to do with the day to day running of an agency now without the National link. This is a fact that is confirmed in its content matter as more local issues are discussed than National on a weekly basis.

 

 Next two years.

 

Well I hope for more of the same. There is certainly never a shortage of topics as everything surrounding the Industry is discussed on a weekly basis. From viewings to agreements, buying property and preparation for the market, Informing both Tenants and Landlords, discussing professionalism and how to deal with problems, we have covered it all and hopefully will continue to do the same, no matter what changes are introduced.

 

03May 2012

Current Property News: Council and Mortgage provider offer key to the future?

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

 

An unusual link has been formed in the launch of a new scheme to assist first time buyers in the Staffordshire Moorlands. Leek United Building Society has put together a scheme with Staffordshire Moorlands District Council to offer 95% mortgages to those who cannot afford the usual 25% deposit currently required by most mortgages but can afford the monthly re-payments.

 

Target audience.

 

The scheme is targeted at first time buyers who either live or work in the Staffordshire Moorlands catchment area. Presumably for the property being purchased to be acceptable, the house will need to be within the Moorlands catchment area. This can only be looked upon as a good idea by Staffordshire Moorlands Council, who will presumably attract more Council Tax payers for the region and at the same time removing pressure on the Council’s social housing needs.

 

Finances.

 

The idea is that the Council will approve purchasers providing they meet with the rules of the scheme and then act as Guarantor for the payment of the monthly mortgage.  Also fees chargeable appear to be very transparent from the start, so those looking to sign up should be able to budget all costs applicable prior to applying. The role of the third party (Sector Treasury Services Ltd) listed as part of the agreement is not made clear, but I would presume that they are able to assist in the 5% deposit required.

 

Timescale.                      

 

The scheme is only available for a short period until the end of August 2012, but hopefully it will be a success and it is certainly one that I shall be keeping an eye on. If it does prove successful, hopefully other Councils will also be keen to look at the implications and results as it would seem to me to be an innovative way of dealing with the perennial problem for first time buyers, especially with the current mortgages that are available.

 

Market effect.

 

I also feel that it is an idea which will have little effect on the rental market, which you will forgive me for considering. Yes there may be some reduction in Tenants, but at a time when the market needs any kind of encouragement it can get, especially in an area like the Moorlands who rely on the more traditional industries which are probably affected more by the current financial uncertainty than most it is good to see people thinking outside of the box. Time will of course tell, but I for one applaud the positive move. Hopefully when tested there will be enough people willing and able to fulfil the criteria set out by those concerned in this laudable initiative.

19Apr 2012

Current Property News: EPC Regulations still being clarified.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

With the recent change in EPC regulations, we like many other Agents turned to our advisors and asked for clarification of what the changes meant and what was there considered practical way they could advise us to adopt the changes as required. The answer we received raised more questions than it answered and we were left none the wiser. It appear that the manner in which the changes have been introduced have left those who carry out the inspections at a quandary in understanding what is now required.

Agents requirements.

The main change for Letting Agents is to have the EPC available within seven days of the property being marketed. I am pleased to say that this was our own timetable anyway but always done with the knowledge that we had longer if the EPC was not forthcoming. No for us the clarity needs to be around what is meant by an electronic copy, when the report from the RLA states that the new format should be used after April 1st, but fails to say if this is ONLY for new EPC’s created rather than an updated version of the old certificate.

Words speak volumes.

 Some reports suggest that this is the case, but when you attempt to download EPC’s that are still current but were produced in the old format, they are still in the old format! So ‘the powers that be’ need to clarify for those concerned what they should or should not be doing. It becomes more of a problem when those that are supposed to be advising do not know themselves!

Simple guidelines.

At present we are ensuring we are operating in a manner best suited to the intent of these changes until we receive total clarity, which means we will avoid any unnecessary costly changes to our systems whilst still providing the information when requested and ensuring one is available without delay.

These guidelines will hopefully assist in the meantime:

1. When viewing a property ideally an EPC or at least the new front page should be “available”

2. Available means it can be in electronic format

3. An EPC MUST be commissioned immediately on marketing if existing one not available

4. Long as you can prove you have commissioned then for up to 7 days you can view and market without one. It is an offence but there is no penalty!! It is after 7 days that it becomes more serious

5. The eventual winning tenant MUST be given a copy of the full EPC when the contract starts i.e. at check-in.

18Apr 2012

Current Property News: Rightmove figures give insight for purchasers.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

In surfing the net for Current Property News, I note with interest two sets of figures that have been published this week. Firstly the Rightmove calculation of asking prices throughout the country and secondly The Average House guide published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) Bothe offer many varied statistics, breaking down details by region and County as well as National.

Significance of the gap.

When you look at the two headline figures, it is quiet significant that the asking price on average across the Country is £20,000 higher than the actual selling price and with the push of the Rightmove report being that on average house prices are at an all time high again across the Country, it does look as if sellers, knowing they will get offers no matter how the word the price within sales particulars, are asking at a higher level and negotiating on average a 10% lower price than that asked for.

Significant difference.

But what is also apparent is that the difference in average prices between London and the rest of the Country is vast and still growing. Since the peak of 2008, prices in London have risen by 14.9% whereas prices in the rest of the UK have fallen by 4.3% during the same period. This such a significant swing that it does make the average figures somewhat irrelevant, but the regional figures given by Rightmove are very informative and definitely give significant information for those needing to track values across this time frame.

Solid information.

It is good for all interested parties to receive information both in this manner and broken down in to regional statistics that both reports give. For example I have a property myself that was initially marketed in late 2007, it is currently rented (no surprise there then!) but as the Tenant has asked about the opportunity to purchase, it is easy for me to work out what would be the current price using the averages published in these reports. Both parties can use then for the same reasons, definitely allowing initial conversations to take place without the expense or time needed to get the property re-valued.

Assistance.

I cannot see how this situation does anything but assist people by keeping them informed. For the professionals, some of the mystique of pricing houses is removed, giving the vendor and buyer better confidence in the asking price and indeed any offers made as well. A definite win – win situation and I applaud Rightmove in particular for the manner in which they present the information and make it easily available for all.

Look and you will find.

The only disappointment and yes there had to be one! Is that the BBC who I have oft criticised for the way in which they place a negative spin on anything to do with the housing market have chosen to scale down the amount of reporting now that the shock and horror of house prices falling has lessened and we have all learnt to live with what the market delivers? Like most, I see slow growth continuing which most commentators agree with. It seems the BBC is only happy to give more time to the housing market when it gives them the opportunity to report on bad news and it looks as though our market will continue to receive little air time from the BBC for the foreseeable future. Time will tell if I am right!

17Apr 2012

Current Property News: Landlord wins Judgement against bad Tenant.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

Just occasionally matters come to the point where faith in the system is not only renewed but also rewarded! The news we received this week is one of those cases.  We have a Landlord who has had great faith in dealing with the situation that was presented to them in a professional and thorough manner through the courts. Thankfully to a good conclusion as this was after we advised the Landlord that it was a case worthy of legal judgement,  ensuring that the Tenant was not allowed to get away with the state that they left the Landlords property in at the end of the Tenancy.

Ignored instruction.

We soon realised at the start of the Tenancy whilst doing our property visits that the house was not being cared for in the proper manner. General untidiness was soon becoming harmful to both the inside and outside of the house. We did everything we could to get the Tenant to carry out the work required, but in the end under instruction from the Landlord, following our advice, notice was given to leave. Any effort to keep the property in order at that stage ceased.

Check out.

When we then came to check the Tenants out of the property, the work needed to return the property to good order was vast! We photographed, noted, gained quotes and spoke to the Tenant about getting the work carried out. They disagreed, refused and eventually ignored all communications until the Landlord had no choice but to instruct the work in order for the home to be available for the rental market again.

Options.

 At this point we spoke again at length and in the end after looking at the cost of the dilapidations advised the Landlord to take the matter to court. This is of course a big decision to make, not only for the inevitable risk that such a decision brings with it, but also because of the actual task itself which can of course be daunting. The Landlords stood by their conviction and filed papers.

Courts take time.

Never was a statement more true. The original hearing was cancelled twice initially after sitting around all day to be told the court did not have enough time to hear the case, then at the Tenants request until a third date was finally set for this month and only now has the Landlord finally received a judgement. This made all the more understandable when you realise that the Tenant actually vacated in June 2010!!

Award.

But in the end it was worth it! The courts awarded the Landlord the whole of the claim for damages, the deposit in full and two months loss of rent because of the length of time it took to get the property fit for the market again. This is made all the better with the knowledge that the Tenant who replaced the person claimed against still enjoy living there and are treating the property as it should be treated by any good Tenant.

Summary

And what do we take from all of this? Well first of all that currently the law does not move quick enough to resolve matters for Landlords under such circumstances; it does not make sense for anybody to be left waiting for two years for a decision to be arrived at and even if it had been heard the first time the case was cancelled it would still have been nearly a year. That the reasons why such a case can be delayed for a further year are too lenient, because it should NOT be possible to postpone a hearing with such ease as was the case for the further delays suffered  and that Landlords need better help from the Deposit holding bodies, as this was a substantial amount they should not have been made to cope without when you consider the amount awarded to the Landlord by the Judge was over £3000.

The good side!

But thankfully the biggest conclusion is that it does pay to take your case to the courts. I of course do not know for sure, but people who leave property in such a condition probably hope the problem will go away because of the trouble needed to pursue the matter to conclusion, but also in the end the courts have awarded correctly and it proves that errant Tenants can be brought to justice if the Landlords have the strength of character to hold true!

13Apr 2012

Tenant Advise: Problems finding a house to rent.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

A letter recently published in my Local Stafford Paper, questioned the ability for some Tenants in difficult situations to be able to rent property in the town. The blame has been placed purely with the local Letting Agents, but takes a very simplistic view of the reasons why they have struggled. There are far more factors that need to be considered before any judgement can be made, and I am going to put the case for the agent through these pages.

 Law of Agency.

 Here it is again! But so many Tenants do not understand that we are bound by our (legal) agreement with the Landlord to give best advise under all circumstances. I offer a quote from a recent article by David Smith of Anthony Gold Solicitors, in The Negotiator magazine ‘this means that the Agent must act in his clients interests even where that produces a harsh outcome for the other party, in this case the Tenant’ I quote because I believe his words confirm the reality of our position better than any other description I have ever heard. So if a Landlord does not want pets, we would be breaking our legal agreement if we allowed Tenants with pets to move in to a house with express knowledge that they had. Equally, if a Landlord does not wish for Tenants in receipt of benefits then, we have to obey this instruction in exactly the same manner. We are not here to be judge or to offer succour to those in need, no matter how worthy the cause. We are here to follow our Landlords instruction, to the letter!

 The benefit system.

 There are several areas where the Benefits system fails to deliver for the Landlord, firstly, they pay four weekly in arrears. This means that the Landlord has to find more than a full month’s rent to keep his cash flow in order. Why, when we have sufficient Tenants who are able to pay rent in advance, should we suggest that the Landlord waits for their money and only gets a percentage of it (Yes it catches up eventually but not for a full year!) when they do receive payment. It is also paid direct to the Tenant now, and, as happened in our latest case, only when the rent was two months in arrears would the Council start to communicate with us as the Agent of the Landlord and only when the Tenant agreed, would the Council pay the rent direct to us. Please tell me why, under those circumstances should we encourage acceptance of Tenants in receipt of benefits. It would be good to say this was an isolated incident, and it would also be wrong to say that problems occur with all Benefit claimants. Unfortunately for those who do respect their commitment, most do not.

 Insurance.

 One of the (many!) benefits of using an Agent, is our ability to have the Tenants professionally referenced. All Agents should use a referencing Company whose acceptance of the Tenants automatically places the Landlord in a position to take Landlord Insurance to protect the Rent and pay Legal expenses should they be needed. Now because the system works well and because Agents know how to manage and control debt, the policies are still available in some instances for less than £100 per year (I only quote this figure as an example, because with FSA regulations in mind, I am not able to discuss the benefits of one Company above another!) If this was a policy that was relied upon again and again by Landlords it would cost far more, so it confirms without any doubt, that the referencing system works! Finally, no Agent worth their salt should, in my opinion, operate without the ability to offer Rent and Legal Expenses Insurance. Otherwise, how can it be argued that they are giving best advice to their clients?

 Guarantors.

 If a Tenant does not earn sufficient income, they may need a Guarantor; this is the natural manner in which income short fallings are balanced against the Industry standards used for income calculations. However, all Guarantors MUST be able to afford the rent. Look at the situation from the Tenants point of view, if a Tenant who could not afford the rent was moved in to a property without any check at all, it could be argued very easily that the Agent or Landlord had acted without due care to the Tenant, placing them in a position where they are unable to afford the commitment they have made. No different than being oversold items on Higher Purchase! Now, if they are able to provide a Guarantor, I can see no difference (and neither can the Industry) in what they should also be able to afford! Just because somebody agrees to be a Guarantor does not mean that the Tenant is automatically protected. The legal agreement clearly confirms that the Guarantor is responsible for the Tenants short fallings which includes all financial matters involved with the Tenancy. Now again, if we just accepted people on face value and they suddenly found themselves with a bill they could not pay, have we done our duty as Agents? Under such circumstances the Guarantor could easily claim to have been unfairly treated.

 Financial limits.

 Finally, the rates at which affordability calculations are judged, are not the responsibility of the Lettings Industry. They are developed and run by the financial referencing organisations, from whom Letting Agents are only responsible for using their services, not the manner in which they operate. We are all faced with rules that we have to abide by that we have input into the detail would be very rare. This is one such position. But as I have indicated before, such organisations and Insurance companies are subject to the law in the FSA regulations they must abide by. What we should NOT do is blandly allow people to be referenced for a property they cannot afford.

 Summary.

 So, it is very easy to blame the Industry and Agents in particular, but there are wider issues and pictures that need to be considered. That these people who were the reason for writing this piece have had difficulties because they are on Disability Allowance and Housing Benefit, I say they should look to the social organisations that are supposed to help them, rather than the Industry that on the face of it would have to break several codes of conduct to accommodate them. We are not able to move people in too a property against the Landlords wishes, we cannot ignore referencing and neither can we place our Landlords in a position where they cannot take the benefits of the most basic of Industry Insurance Policies. We cannot ignore the possible implications of accepting Housing Benefit Tenants and neither should we ignore what a Tenant and Guarantor can or cannot afford. Rather than being unfair, when you consider our legal position and to whom we are responsible, that is being Professional!