Keys Letting Centre

News & Information

ENERGY CERTIFICATES: yet another twist in the pursuit of bureaucratic heaven. From October all properties on the letting market will have to have an energy certificate giving a rating of their fuel efficiency etc. It will be illegal to even advertise a property without one in force. What we hear so far is that fines of £200 a day will be put in force for such heinous offences. Rough estimates so far of the cost of this measure range from £100 - £400 per property depending on size. These are supposed to last 10 years.

As usual no full information has been released so we will update this entry as we learn more.

Health & Safety-see LAW Section for latest nonsense.

Tenant Deposits

The law on holding tenant deposits changed in April 2007. From then on all tenant deposits must be registered in one of three schemes. Keys Letting have opted for the non-custodial scheme by which we pass on deposits, where collected, to the Deposit Protection Service. At the end of the tenancy the deposit may not be returned to the tenant or given to the landlord/agent unless an agreement is reached between both parties. If no agreement is reached within 28 days the matter can be referred to arbitration but as this is likely to involve a prolonged delay it is obviously in the interests of both parties that some agreement is reached privately.

The penalties for not registering deposits involve the payment of compensation to the tenant of three times the deposit amount; it may also be that the rights the landlord has under the tenancy agreement will be unenforceable.

Under two of the schemes Letting Agents and Estate Agents are allowed to keep the deposit money but under severe restrictions. If a dispute arises between tenant and owner about proposed deductions from the deposit the matter must be referred to the respective scheme organisers and no monies can be kept back without their permission. Their word is final. Letting agents would have to pass on any fees for using the system to owners; we would, in effect, be holding money we have little or no control over and so there would appear little or nothing to be gained from us using these particular schemes..

Obviously there is a potential here for chaos and delay. It is true that some landlords have been unfair in the disposal of their tenants' deposits and we know of cases where tenants have simply been 'ripped' off. We also read that around 20% of tenants nationally cancel their last month's rent payment and tell landlords to use their deposit as rent thereby breaching their tenancy agreement and leaving owners with no protection at all (our experience has been nothing like this).

This new system offers protection for tenants from dishonest landlords but considerably reduces protection for landlords from dishonest tenants. As letting agents we see both sides of this question; we know there are some dishonest owners out there as well as some dishonest tenants.

This change will mean that thorough referencing of applicants will be even more important than ever. We believe that housing benefit recipients will become less attractive as tenants. The expanding market for letting will even more be at the quality end of the market where the risk is less. This has been the case for some time now but the changes are likely to accelerate this trend.

LATEST: the scheme has now been running for nearly year and we are in a position to pass comment on how it has been working. Dealing with tenants who fully honour their obligations under this system has not been a problem; then, it never was. The problem is with awkward tenants who will not co-operate. So far we have avoided any major problems but we have heard from other agents who have had severe problems. For example, the tenant who knew she would not get her deposit back and refused to communicate with the DPS. As things stand now, the deposit will remain forever locked in the system. Her attitude was, 'If I can't have the money no one else will either'.

"I'll take it!" - Cautionary tales of reference checks

There are always those who do not think that their references will be taken up....

First Case

We once received a glowing testimonial for a man wanting to rent a small flat. In it his employers spoke of the applicant's integrity, the fact that he was about to get engaged and they wished good luck to him and his fiancee in their new life together at the flat, noting also that he had been living in company accommodation and been an excellent tenant. Something made us suspicious; the standard of English in the letter was not very good considering it was supposed to be written by the secretary of the business.

We phoned them.

It turns out the letter had been written by the applicant himself on headed notepaper he had stolen from the office. Unfortunately, he got the sack but we also learned that he was currently renting flats all over the country and had a fiancee in each one. He was serial philanderer whose job as a coach driver enabled him to live this life style. And, as you might expect, he was in arrears all over the country as well. Having once moved in he paid no further rent and disappeared after he had pushed his luck as far as he could. He had not rented from his Employer.

In Another Case

A very self-confident man approached us to rent a house. He had just been appointed chef at a reputable restaurant in the area. He put down a deposit by pulling out the fattest wad of notes I have ever seen and peeling off the required number. I suppose by this we were supposed to be impressed and think that here was a man of considerable financial standing.

We phoned his "employer".

They didn't know him. We didn't bother with the credit check. We just gave him his notes back.

And yet Another...

A very well-spoken man applied to rent a cottage. He was renting already locally. His landlord never answered the phone. One of his referees was a knight of the realm and actually in "Who's Who". Impressed? Yes we were. Unfortunately, he was out of the country at the time (in Madagascar as it happens) and his wife did not like being disturbed and we were told not to call her. She was far too important to be bothered by tradesmen.

We presented his deposit cheque to our bank. It bounced.

The cottage was soon successfully let- to someone with more ordinary, if morecontactable, referees none of whom were in "Who's Who". Moral of the stories: never accept anyone at face value and phone, fax or whatever, those referees.

Law Changes re Electrical Work

From January 2005 the law governing electrical work at let properties changed.

Owners who are not qualified electricians are no longer be lawfully able to carry out anything other than very minor electrical work at let houses and flats without consulting the local works department and ensuring Building Regulations are complied with. Employing a qualified electrical contractor will mean that owners do not have to do this. In this way the law governing electrical appliances and installation moves closer to that relating to work on gas appliances.

It is already a necessity to have a certificate for electrical appliances and installation.

Installation checks need re-doing about every 4 years; appliance checks must be done once a year and now the courts are holding agents and landlords responsible for any faults not spotted between tenancies, even if the annual check is not due for some time. This is on the grounds that outgoing tenants may have tampered with either appliances or wiring etc. We know of a case where the previous tenant replaced a gas cooker with an electric one but made no changes to the electric supply. The landlord, surprisingly, did not notice this rather basic change as he kept no detailed inventory and did not visit the property very often. Soon, a new tenant moved in and the cooker literally blew up shortly afterwards. Death or injury could have resulted.

TAKE NO RISKS WITH TENANT SAFETY OR YOUR LIBERTY!

Always use qualified personnel for your electrical and gas work.

Crime Figures of Interest

Crime and our Area- South Lakeland, which includes Ulverston and surrounding areas, is a good place to live.

Compare crime figures as shown below with the National Average in brackets

Population 102,400 (138,540)

Households 44,100 (57,610)

Figures below are per 1,000 people:

Theft from a vehicle 3.4 (10.8)

Theft of motor vehicle 1.4 (4.8)

Burglary 2.4 (6.7)

Robbery 0.1 (1.4)

Sexual Offences 0.3 (0.8)

Violence against person 6.7 (14.0)

Notices of Possession (Section 21 Notice).

Important Developments

Good landlords will know that notices of possession must give the tenant at least 2 months' clear notice and must date from the beginning of a rent period. The last day of a tenancy period which started on the 10th of the month would be the 9th of the following month. In this case many landlords would give notice to expire on the 10th of the second month following as it is obviously not possible to take possession on the 9th as the tenant is still paying rent until midnight !

In a recent court case, James McDonald v Fernandez (19/8/03), the judges ruled that a Notice issued by the landlord in such a manner was invalid. Without going deeply into the reasons for this judgement we point out that their lordships decided that as the legislation says notice should expire "after" a given date not "on", it is necessary to use the date which is the last day of the rent period. In the example we have given this would be the 9th day, so the expiry date of that Notice must read "after 9th of (month X)", not "on the 9th" or " after the 10th"or "on the 10th". t may seem like hair-splitting but in this case the tenant went to court and had the Notice overturned delaying the date of possession by months and entailing whatever legal and court expenses were involved for the landlord, not to mention his time and effort and stress.

What do you do if the Tenant still doesn't Leave the Property when the Notice expires?

The only way to legally remove the tenant in this case is through the courts. Any attempt to pressurise the tenant, by repeated visits, forcible language, interfering with gas, water or electrical supplies etc. can land you in court. In some cases tenants have obtained very large sums of money from landlords (£20,000+) for this type of activity. To avoid this adding of insult to injury, you have to obtain a possession order from the county court. There are two types relating to Assured Shorthold tenancies, the most used perhaps being the Accelerated Possession Order.

This is generally the quickest route but it does not enable landlords to obtain any order for re-payment of arrears- only for court expenses. Landlords should be careful in accepting rent after the notice period has expired as a court could interpret this as a setting up of a new tenancy and hence major legal problems can result which you would need to employ a solicitor to resolve. If the date set by the court for the tenant to leave the property is not complied with another application has to be made for their eviction by court bailiffs. This is all very wearisome for the landlord and no doubt there are tenants who know how to play the system. Fortunately, it is a rare event but landlords should avoid the temptation to 'short-circuit' the process. If you stick by the letter of the law you will get the result in the end.

And next time no doubt take more care who you let in. Most problems with tenants stem from poor referencing.

Keys Letting Centre - Letting Agents