Hi there
I wonder if I can pick the brains of people more expert than myself re the above.
Basically I had a tenant who was in my property for 3 years from early 2010. The agent charged me for a rent collection service the first year (a percentage of the rent) and obviously undertook references. Following the first year I removed the rent collection and had it on a let only basis for them for the 2nd (for an additional fee) and then it went onto a periodic aftet the end of the AST.
Whilst I received the rent from the agent during the first year- it was sometimes a few days late. However for the first 15 or so months after I dispensed with the rent colleciton the rent was paid on time, however after this the rent was not paid and only paid in instalments when I chased. Upon the tenant giving me notice to leave, there was still 3 months outstanding which I managed to get down to about 1.5 months by the time he left. He then had the cheek to ask for the deposit back which after going to TDS I was awarded.
When I contacted the letting agent for the references I was horrified to find that the tenant had an unsatisfied CCJ for almost 4k, 7 months before the tenancy started. Yet I was not told about this.
Without the benefit of hindsight I can clearly say I would not have taken him on had I been told about the CCJ- as I was clear about the type of tenant I was looking for.
The letting agent accepts that I should have been told about the CCJ and has apologised. It then goes on to say how it has changed its dealings over the issue since that time to the extent of getting something signed by the landlord if there are outstanding CCJs. However it is not willing to provide me with a refund of the initial fee it took for the rent collection and letting. Given I am still out of pocket which would have not been the case as I wouldnt have taken the tenant on board and it has failed to provide me with an adequate basic service- should I be entitled to pursue it for a refund (either in full or a proportion)? Or am I being unreasonable?
If the view is that I am entitled can you let me know any relevent case law or prescedent which could support me as I dont want to take the matter to a small claims court.
I wonder if I can pick the brains of people more expert than myself re the above.
Basically I had a tenant who was in my property for 3 years from early 2010. The agent charged me for a rent collection service the first year (a percentage of the rent) and obviously undertook references. Following the first year I removed the rent collection and had it on a let only basis for them for the 2nd (for an additional fee) and then it went onto a periodic aftet the end of the AST.
Whilst I received the rent from the agent during the first year- it was sometimes a few days late. However for the first 15 or so months after I dispensed with the rent colleciton the rent was paid on time, however after this the rent was not paid and only paid in instalments when I chased. Upon the tenant giving me notice to leave, there was still 3 months outstanding which I managed to get down to about 1.5 months by the time he left. He then had the cheek to ask for the deposit back which after going to TDS I was awarded.
When I contacted the letting agent for the references I was horrified to find that the tenant had an unsatisfied CCJ for almost 4k, 7 months before the tenancy started. Yet I was not told about this.
Without the benefit of hindsight I can clearly say I would not have taken him on had I been told about the CCJ- as I was clear about the type of tenant I was looking for.
The letting agent accepts that I should have been told about the CCJ and has apologised. It then goes on to say how it has changed its dealings over the issue since that time to the extent of getting something signed by the landlord if there are outstanding CCJs. However it is not willing to provide me with a refund of the initial fee it took for the rent collection and letting. Given I am still out of pocket which would have not been the case as I wouldnt have taken the tenant on board and it has failed to provide me with an adequate basic service- should I be entitled to pursue it for a refund (either in full or a proportion)? Or am I being unreasonable?
If the view is that I am entitled can you let me know any relevent case law or prescedent which could support me as I dont want to take the matter to a small claims court.
