letting agent fear

Tell them that if they don't improve their act, you will take your business elsewhere. Be prepared to do so if necessary. If you can't find a better agent to move to, consider taking on the job yourself. It's only 3 properties, how much work can it be? I speak as someone who lets only one flat, and that takes approximately zero effort, and three times approximately zero is still not very much... ;-)

i agree, we have several properties rented out and handle it ourselves, take rent on standing order bank on line and you can check the money has arrived on the due date instantly, no problem

I'd check to see if they have ARLA membership, as this will mean they have strict rules on handling client monies, such as ring fencing it in a client account rather than using it to fund their cashflow.

"Adrian Boliston" wrote

What happens if they are a member of ARLA, but choose not to follow the rules? How long might it be before ARLA finds out & does anything about it?

Going elsewhere does not alter the probability of the agent going bust or vanishing. Picking an older bigger firm diminishes the risk but greatly decreases the quality of the service. Can't do the job myself as I spend 5 months of the year working abroad. Workwise its different to having a flat,

3 houses each with 5 post adolescents in them means about 5 phone calls a week relating to repairs. >

"handle it ourselves" makes all the difference. With me its a one woman operation. I managed the properties myself for 16 years. The fun wears off after a few years (after 18months nowadays!) and you never get over the fact that 18 years ago there was a 12% return on the investment plus capital growth, and 3 viewings was enough to let a house (with people breaking down in tears if they lost the house that they wanted). Now the thought of managing my houses gives me palpitations!

They are members of some estate agnecy body or other. I'm in the process of investigating that.

Under the new rules the deposits should be bonded or insured for the protection of the tenant. It should no longer be in the agent's bank account. (unless you are in Scotland)

tim

Credit Rating: I

Credit Category: Red

Oh dear, replying to my own posts!!! I just carried out this search on creditgate.com and this is what it saya about my agents! Is this as bad as it looks?!!!

Credit Limit: ZERO

Credit Score Date: 14/02/2008

Then you have probably done the right thing by hiving the drudgery off to professionals. But it eats into your return, which is already much reduced from the "good old days". Perhaps the time has come to consider selling up.

I would then have to invest the money somewhere else! After having paid tax. I don't mind paying management fees, but the problem is that the market is so competetive and it has resulted in a lowering of management standards. Its as if the multitude of agents all know they are as bad as each other and that landlords will just have to put up with a lousy service. As a landlord you won't get any sympathy from Trading Standards etc as they are mofre geared up to help tenants.

But only for tenancies which started after the new rules came in.

Some of these bodies provide insurance to cover clients in the event of bankruptcy. Though there was some question as to whether the premiums had been paid, when Gerlings went bankrupt about 15 years ago. (The

200,000 owed to tenants and clients was eventually repaid, a year or two later, but of course there were invisible losses in the form of empty flats etc.). And some of the employees seemed willing, near the end, to say it was nigh.

How to predict if they're about to vanish? Well, have a look at their personal demeanour. Are they unkempt, show signs of sluggishness? Do they avoid doing work?

Maybe they're all working second jobs as the estate agency isn't paying them. That would explain why they are unkempt and appear generally knackered. Maybe they aren't doing any work because the trades they would get to do the work are refusing to deal with them because of unpaid bills?

Personally I'd move at least one property to a different agent. At least that way you've spread the risk a bit. They may also see it as "punishment" for putting your costs up and that might discourage them from trying it on again.

By the way, did you mean by 2% of what they were, or by 2% of rent? The former wouldn't be very much at all, the latter could be, well, bewteen about 10% and 20% really, given that typical fees are between

10% and 20% of rent.

To their defence one could say that their costs (staff and office) are no doubt steadily rising with inflation. So long as rental income keeps pace with inflation, the cut they need to take can stay at the same percentage level. But if not (and it hasn't been), then something has to give. Either they must boost income (by charging you more) or cut costs (by laying off some staff and expecting the rest to take on their workload) or by a combination (e.g. taking on more clients but not more staff).

Last month isn't so long ago. Maybe the service got worse, and they mean they need the money to "improve" it back to the way it was. :-)

They don't belong to anything at all!