EXPERT: Why are so many agents and landlords ignoring fees law?
The Tenant Fees Act has been in place for nearly four years but is it shocking how many property professionals, also known as letting agents, are either not aware of its existence, or believe they can charge a fee as long as they call it something else.
I have looked at the 34 most recent cases heard by First Tier Tribunals relating to Tenant Fees Act and any financial penalties awarded.
Shockingly of these cases only ten were brought against landlords who were self-managing, the rest were all against letting agents, a number of which where high street national agents which, in my opinion should have known better.
The most common complaints raised by tenants were:
- Refusing to refund holding deposits 58.8%
- Early termination fees 14.7%
- Security deposit over 5 weeks 8.8%
For this last category all three were brought against self-managing landlords.
And in all but four of these cases, the Tribunal found in favour of the tenant and ordered the agent/landlord to refund them in part or full.
The tribunal awarded the return of over £11,500 of prohibited fees to tenants or £385 per case on average.
More worryingly many of the agents who defended their cases claimed the holding deposit was ‘a reservation cost’ or ‘advanced rent’.
It’s clear that several well-known agencies have recently tried to disguise a prohibited fee by claiming that an Assured Shorthold Tenancy has not been created and therefore the Tenant Fees Act doesn’t apply.
What is seriously concerning is the fact that landlords who are clearly taking heed of ‘unconscious incompetence’ and putting their trust in letting agents to manage their asset within the law are being let down at the very first (and can I say) rather basic hurdle.
If property professionals aren’t aware of the regulations how can the negative reputation surrounding the private rented sector ever improve?
Here’s my guide for both landlords and agents
What is a holding deposit?
A holding deposit is a payment made to a landlord or letting agent to reserve a property.
The holding deposit cannot be more than 1 weeks’ worth of rent and the property must be removed from the market.
Since the introduction of the Tenant Fees Act there are now have some strict rules that need to be followed when taking a holding deposit.
I will just point out that a holding deposit is not a legal requirement and doesn’t have to be taken, but if one is taken then the following must be done correctly.
Only one holding deposit can be taken for a property
It is not uncommon for some landlords and agents to take more than one holding deposit and then simply refund those who don’t pass referencing or fail to refund anyone in one of the cases at the Tribunal.
Receipt and Holding Deposit information
When a holding deposit it taken, it is a legal requirement to provide the tenant with a receipt for the funds as well as a document that sets out what the holding deposit it for, how long it will be held and the clear reasons for refund and for withholding it.
Failure to provide this to the applicant could mean you are subject to a find or having to refund the monies.
Provide a copy of the tenancy agreement
A draft copy of the tenancy agreement must also be given to the applicant when the holding deposit is take, this document can have water marks to show it is a draft, but it must contain the terms of the tenancy that the tenant will be expected to enter into
14 days to enter into a tenancy
Under the Tenant Fees Act, you have 14 days to enter into a tenancy agreement from the date the holding deposit is paid, if this is not possible, may be due to referencing not coming back in time, then the agent or landlord would need to sign and agreement to extent the time. If this is not done then the holding deposit must be returned in full on day 15.
When can a holding deposit be withheld?
Failed referencing
It is not uncommon for applicants to fail referencing, but this is not automatically a reason to withhold the holding deposit.
Only if applicants have provided false or misleading information that would have made you move forward with he let would give you reason to possibly withhold if they failed referencing.
Not entering into a tenancy
If the tenant fails to take reasonable steps to enter into the tenancy, then the agent or landlord could retain the holding deposit, but if it is the agent or landlord who is dragging their feet then the holding deposit should be returned if the tenant pulls out of the let.
If either party changes their mind
If the applicant changes their mind before the let is agreed, then the landlord or agent can usually retain the holding deposit, as long as the agent or landlord have not done something to force the tenant to change their mind.
Also, if the landlord changes their mind, then the holding deposit would need to be refunded as long as the reason for the change was not a deliberate act to mislead by the applicant.
Author bio
Julie Ford is a Property Redress Scheme (PRS) Tenancy Mediator with over 25 years’ experience of working in the private rented sector
View Full Article: EXPERT: Why are so many agents and landlords ignoring fees law?
Post comment
Categories
- Landlords (19)
- Real Estate (9)
- Renewables & Green Issues (1)
- Rental Property Investment (1)
- Tenants (21)
- Uncategorized (11,916)
Archives
- December 2024 (43)
- November 2024 (64)
- October 2024 (82)
- September 2024 (69)
- August 2024 (55)
- July 2024 (64)
- June 2024 (54)
- May 2024 (73)
- April 2024 (59)
- March 2024 (49)
- February 2024 (57)
- January 2024 (58)
- December 2023 (56)
- November 2023 (59)
- October 2023 (67)
- September 2023 (136)
- August 2023 (131)
- July 2023 (129)
- June 2023 (128)
- May 2023 (140)
- April 2023 (121)
- March 2023 (168)
- February 2023 (155)
- January 2023 (152)
- December 2022 (136)
- November 2022 (158)
- October 2022 (146)
- September 2022 (148)
- August 2022 (169)
- July 2022 (124)
- June 2022 (124)
- May 2022 (130)
- April 2022 (116)
- March 2022 (155)
- February 2022 (124)
- January 2022 (120)
- December 2021 (117)
- November 2021 (139)
- October 2021 (130)
- September 2021 (138)
- August 2021 (110)
- July 2021 (110)
- June 2021 (60)
- May 2021 (127)
- April 2021 (122)
- March 2021 (156)
- February 2021 (154)
- January 2021 (133)
- December 2020 (126)
- November 2020 (159)
- October 2020 (169)
- September 2020 (181)
- August 2020 (147)
- July 2020 (172)
- June 2020 (158)
- May 2020 (177)
- April 2020 (188)
- March 2020 (234)
- February 2020 (212)
- January 2020 (164)
- December 2019 (107)
- November 2019 (131)
- October 2019 (145)
- September 2019 (123)
- August 2019 (112)
- July 2019 (93)
- June 2019 (82)
- May 2019 (94)
- April 2019 (88)
- March 2019 (78)
- February 2019 (77)
- January 2019 (71)
- December 2018 (37)
- November 2018 (85)
- October 2018 (108)
- September 2018 (110)
- August 2018 (135)
- July 2018 (140)
- June 2018 (118)
- May 2018 (113)
- April 2018 (64)
- March 2018 (96)
- February 2018 (82)
- January 2018 (92)
- December 2017 (62)
- November 2017 (100)
- October 2017 (105)
- September 2017 (97)
- August 2017 (101)
- July 2017 (104)
- June 2017 (155)
- May 2017 (135)
- April 2017 (113)
- March 2017 (138)
- February 2017 (150)
- January 2017 (127)
- December 2016 (90)
- November 2016 (135)
- October 2016 (149)
- September 2016 (135)
- August 2016 (48)
- July 2016 (52)
- June 2016 (54)
- May 2016 (52)
- April 2016 (24)
- October 2014 (8)
- April 2012 (2)
- December 2011 (2)
- November 2011 (10)
- October 2011 (9)
- September 2011 (9)
- August 2011 (3)
Calendar
Recent Posts
- Landlords’ Rights Bill: Let’s tell the government what we want
- 2025 will be crucial for leasehold reform as secondary legislation takes shape
- Reeves inflationary budget puts mockers on Bank Base Rate reduction
- How to Avoid SDLT Hikes In 2025
- Shelter Scotland slams council for stripping homeless households of ‘human rights’