[kirklancaster]

There is need now for the Government to clamp down very harshly on a corrupt, money-making practice which has been perpetrated for almost a decade now, by rogue Agents and Landlords against unwitting people who are desperate to find rented accommodation.

Not only is this bent practice fleecing often young couples who can ill afford to be conned, it is also exacerbating the accommodation crisis.

The scam works like this:

Say that the Agent or Landlord has a 3 bedroom terrace to let at £500 per Calendar month. Upon ascribing the tenancy, he can expect to receive around £1,000 by way of one month's rent in advance, and a Tenancy Deposit of say, another £500.

In this 'Housing Crisis' hit market, it should take no more than a week to let a decent house.

However, it PAYS some unscupulous Agents and Landlords NOT to let the property.

All thanks to a grossly over-priced little 'invention' called - variously - a 'Documentation Fee', an 'Administration Charge', or a 'Credit Checking and Document Processing Fee'.

The cost of this mandatory 'service' ranges from £50 to nearly £200. depending upon the Agent/Landlords greed, and the prospective tenant pays it when he makes his tenancy application, to be told that he will be notified if his application is successful.

Now the thing is; the Agent/Landlord will probably determine a suitable tenant within days, but if he continues to advertise the property and collect as many additional 'Documentation Fees' as possible, over just 4 to 8 weeks, it is possible to 'process' as many as 100 applications in an averagely busy locale - that's 100 x say £100 on average fees.

That's £10,000 - YES, £10,000 for nothing, and this average can increase sharply in London and the South.

It costs less than £10.00 to credit check a tenant - even less on a Company or Landlord 'member package' - and carrying out confirmation checks with tenant's 'referees' costs even less, so so as can be seen, it is a lucrative old business.

Once the Agent/Landlord feels he has made enough 'easy' money, he notifies his chosen applicant, ascribes the tenancy and lets the property.

And there is FECK ALL anyone can do about it.

What do my Agents charge - £35.00 - on my instructions.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

There is need now for the Government to clamp down very harshly on a corrupt, money-making practice which has been perpetrated for almost a decade now, by rogue Agents and Landlords against unwitting people who are desperate to find rented accommodation.

Not only is this bent practice fleecing often young couples who can ill afford to be conned, it is also exacerbating the accommodation crisis.

The scam works like this:

Say that the Agent or Landlord has a 3 bedroom terrace to let at £500 per Calendar month. Upon ascribing the tenancy, he can expect to receive around £1,000 by way of one month's rent in advance, and a Tenancy Deposit of say, another £500.

In this 'Housing Crisis' hit market, it should take no more than a week to let a decent house.

However, it PAYS some unscupulous Agents and Landlords NOT to let the property.

All thanks to a grossly over-priced little 'invention' called - variously - a 'Documentation Fee', an 'Administration Charge', or a 'Credit Checking and Document Processing Fee'.

The cost of this mandatory 'service' ranges from £50 to nearly £200. depending upon the Agent/Landlords greed, and the prospective tenant pays it when he makes his tenancy application, to be told that he will be notified if his application is successful.

Now the thing is; the Agent/Landlord will probably determine a suitable tenant within days, but if he continues to advertise the property and collect as many additional 'Documentation Fees' as possible, over just 4 to 8 weeks, it is possible to 'process' as many as 100 applications in an averagely busy locale - that's 100 x say £100 on average fees.

That's £10,000 - YES, £10,000 for nothing, and this average can increase sharply in London and the South.

It costs less than £10.00 to credit check a tenant - even less on a Company or Landlord 'member package' - and carrying out confirmation checks with tenant's 'referees' costs even less, so so as can be seen, it is a lucrative old business.

Once the Agent/Landlord feels he has made enough 'easy' money, he notifies his chosen applicant, ascribes the tenancy and lets the property.

And there is FECK ALL anyone can do about it.

What do my Agents charge - £35.00 - on my instructions.

Indeed that is all wrong,and it should be stamped out I agree.

Something I learned a year to 18 months ago,not related to all you have comprehensively informed us of above.
I doubt anyone would disagree with you that all needs looking at and getting rid of.

As to the selling off again of Social housing.
I came across someone in trouble with the bedroom tax,however I them learned that the rent for their house was in excess of £120 per week.
However, right next door to that person was a former Council house, which the tenants had bought in the 80s, they'd since died and their family sold the house on.

It was then bought by someone who wanted to rent it out,I was stunned to find the first house of around £120 a week, exactly the same house as the one bought in the 80s obviously, yet that one being privately rented out was set at £980 a month.


Thanks for all that info Kirk,

[Toy Soldier]

Been there too Joey - my last house was on a street that was probably 50/50 owned and council. Was paying £550 a month private rent for a mirror-image of the house across the street... Which was £290 council rent.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Been there too Joey - my last house was on a street that was probably 50/50 owned and council. Was paying £550 a month private rent for a mirror-image of the house across the street... Which was £290 council rent.

Oh this is where my post went,
I think it is disgraceful, social housing should be family homes they should not end up in the hands of unconnected people, other than them buying them and then being able to charge ridiculously high rents.

[Kizzy]

This expoitation by private landlords was why there were rent strikes, now of course they simply bring social housing up in line with those extortionate rents...fair?

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Been there too Joey - my last house was on a street that was probably 50/50 owned and council. Was paying £550 a month private rent for a mirror-image of the house across the street... Which was £290 council rent.

You do realise though, that IRONICALLY, you are not only paying DOUBLE the rent of the Social Housing property, but as a Tax Payer actually SUBSIDISING that property's tenants?

This is just how screwed up and totally unfair the current system is to WORKERS.

Something which I have been trying to say since I joined.

It is not only those in receipt of benefits who are FECKED but also those working and not receiving collosal wages but enough to preclude them from any help.

Often those in receipt of benefits are BETTER off than those working.

No - I am not slagging off benefit claimants just pointing out that the current system can also penalise workers.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

You do realise though, that IRONICALLY, you are not only paying DOUBLE the rent of the Social Housing property, but as a Tax Payer actually SUBSIDISING that property's tenants?

This is just how screwed up and totally unfair the current system is to WORKERS.

Something which I have been trying to say since I joined.

It is not only those in receipt of benefits who are FECKED but also those working and not receiving collosal wages but enough to preclude them from any help.

Often those in receipt of benefits are BETTER off than those working.

No - I am not slagging off benefit claimants just pointing out that the current system can also penalise workers.

TS is working and in receipt of benefits, which category is he in?
If you're working and in a council home are you not subsidising your own home?

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

TS is working and in receipt of benefits, which category is he in?
If you're working and in a council home are you not subsidising your own home?

It just depends on the real 'Market Rent' for the property.

I did not know that T.S was both working and receiving some help, but that does not matter. I - seriously - believe that NO ONE on under £30K pa should be paying ANY tax.

There is NO disposable income from that amount for the average family which lives correctly and pays bills.

If proper tax bands were set for the highest 'earners' those at the bottom of the wage scale could have their burden alleviated.

If a proper drive to identify and stop benefit cheats of ALL types was carried out by the authorities, this too would help, and more money could be allocated to the genuine needy as well as less money taken from the lower wage earners to subsidise these fraudsters.

I only want a FAIRER Britain.

But that can only come from correctly addressing ALL unfair policies - no matter which class of society they are hurting.

[DemolitionRed]

Damn, can't you merge the two?

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

I did not know that T.S was both working and receiving some help, but that does not matter. I - seriously - believe that NO ONE on under £30K pa should be paying ANY tax.

We get the disability element of Child Tax Credits as my 3 year old is autistic, but another thing which is a bit arse backwards, is that it's less than what I pay in tax. So money comes out my pay, into the taxman pocket, then back again in another form. Surely in the modern era of PAYE there should just be a way for it not to come off my pay in the first place? the system is a tangled mess but I've no idea how they'd overhaul it. Every time they try to modernise things it doesn't work and costs a fortune.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

We get the disability element of Child Tax Credits as my 3 year old is autistic, but another thing which is a bit arse backwards, is that it's less than what I pay in tax. So money comes out my pay, into the taxman pocket, then back again in another form. Surely in the modern era of PAYE there should just be a way for it not to come off my pay in the first place? the system is a tangled mess but I've no idea how they'd overhaul it. Every time they try to modernise things it doesn't work and costs a fortune.

I knew it. THIS is what I was referring to - they are actually giving you nothing.

You should not be paying any tax. How the feck is someone supposed to live, pay their way, and save even the smallest amount?