Letting (& Managing) Agent Passing on every fee imaginable to Tenants?

dartstothesea

I work in the property market and although I knew certain letting agents were systematically nickel and diming people, I haven't seen this amount of charges before. Have I been living in a relative cave?

http://www.wmsltd.ie/services/tenant-services

They can forget about inspecting my dwelling if I don't want to pay 100 euro I guess? I'm still gonna be owed my deposit back regardless, so...

I'm aware you can say it's a Landlord's market at the moment and as such they can basically throw in whatever miscellaneous charges they like and still probably find a willing (desperate) tenant to tolerate it. I wouldn't mind seeing less tolerance for it though...

http://www.yelp.ie/biz/westcourt-management-services-ltd-dublin
Quote from the manager/director of the company's reply on Yelp: "Landlords don't owe tenants a lifestyle".
True, but damn do you sound like an <admin snip>.

pcardin

interesting find. I will remember these cowboys. All was fine until that <admin snip> man stepped in and showed his real face. Business ethics? What, where? :pac:

L1011

I'd love to know what the PRTB and PSRA think of someone trying to charge €100 (or is it €200 - move out *and* deposit protection?) to give back a deposit

MarkAnthony

That's surely services to landlords who can't be arsed? They expect the tenant to pay that?

Have to admit it gave me a chuckle.

L1011

MarkAnthony wrote: »

That's surely services to landlords who can't be arsed? They expect the tenant to pay that?

Have to admit it gave me a chuckle.

You would hope so, but on a page full of other services to tenants (letters confirming address, pay rent etc) it doesn't appear to be.

the world wonders

Illegal

90.— (1) Subject to subsection (2), any provision (whether express or implied) in an agreement in respect of the sale or letting of land whereby the purchaser or tenant, as the case may be, is required to pay or otherwise bear the cost of the licensee’s fees or expenses in respect of the sale or letting, as the case may be, shall be void, and any moneys paid pursuant to such a provision shall be recoverable as a simple contract debt in a court of competent jurisdiction.

on_my_oe

They're also keen observers of martial relations

a couple having an argument every few months is usually just a healthy marriage

http://www.wmsltd.ie/residentials/tenant-resources

Apparently they also ask for one and half months rent as deposit

dartstothesea

L1011 wrote: »

I'd love to know what the PRTB and PSRA think of someone trying to charge €100 (or is it €200 - move out *and* deposit protection?) to give back a deposit

That one really stumped me. The only sensible interpretation I could come up with for that is that the 'Deposit Protection' (love how that's phrased, my god) one is probably like a mid-tenancy thing where you pay the guy 100 euro just so he will check everything necessary to reassure you he doesn't already plan to keep all your 1.5 month deposit at a later stage.

Should've called it "deposit rescue" fee or something, that would've really appealed to tenants' fears.

I found some posts by the guy on irishlandlord.com forums (username is WSMAgent) where he pretty casually admits to opening tenants' post and entering the dwelling without consent where he suspects they disappeared. While this can be a grey area for even great landlords, he seemed to make it clear he doesn't give a bollocks.

Interesting to note that although they claim they've never had a PRTB determination "against" them, they seem not to have won their 'automatic fee' nor interest applied to rent paid late by tenants in published determinations re: rent arrears. and I'm 100% certain they never will.

Have to say the chap knows what he's doing to squeeze every cent and make his services highly attractive to hungry landlords.

jd

dartstothesea wrote: »

I found some posts by the guy on irishlandlord.com forums (username is WSMAgent) where he pretty casually admits to opening tenants' post and entering the dwelling without consent where he suspects they disappeared. While this can be a grey area for even great landlords, he seemed to make it clear he doesn't give a bollocks.

Jaysus, he plays fast and loose.

http://www.irishlandlord.com/forum/showpost.php?p=13733&postcount=7

WMSAgent WMSAgent is offline
Senior Member

Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: 21 Wicklow Street, Dublin 2
Posts: 115
Default
The PRTB can use their PPS number to follow them. They've been quite good at it in my experience but I've had to find some tenants myself by checking their old post that was still coming to our apartments.

I couldn't possibly recommend opening someone else's post, but we do it.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1983/en/act/pub/0024/sec0084.html#sec84

84.—(1) A person who—

(a) opens or attempts to open a postal packet addressed to another person or delays or detains any such postal packet or does anything to prevent its due delivery or authorises, suffers or permits another person (who is not the person to whom the postal packet is addressed) to do so, or

(b) discloses the existence or contents of any such postal packet, or

(c) uses for any purpose any information obtained from any such postal packet, or

(d) tampers with any such postal packet,

without the agreement of the person to whom the postal packet is addressed shall be guilty of an offence

The_Morrigan

Folks, while I can see the merit in discussing the pros and cons of passing charges to a tenant - if you make this thread a personal attack on a business, or a person and their character, it will be deleted.

The_Conductor

Why is the agent passing on all these fees to the tenant- when its a tax deductible expense for the landlord (aka it costs the landlord half as much as it costs the tenant)? I don't really get it........

dartstothesea

The_Conductor wrote: »

Why is the agent passing on all these fees to the tenant- when its a tax deductible expense for the landlord (aka it costs the landlord half as much as it costs the tenant)? I don't really get it........

The landlord would still rather pay zero of it than pay half of it, I'm sure. Perhaps there's also a cap on how much it's deductible (say overall across more than 1 rented property of the LL's) and after exceeding that they're paying full whack.
This guy is all about maximising their profits for them, after all.
The way things are now, the agent/LL can offer any raw old deal and if the would-be tenant doesn't like it, can just swiftly let the next hopeful tenant from the orderly queue in the door.

The_Conductor

There is no cap on allowable expenses.
Most management agents charge a flat rate % of the rental income- typically 10%- not this nonsense.

All this does is aggravate the relationship between the tenant and the landlord.

Its all smoke and mirrors anyway- the landlord isn't any better off than they would otherwise be- just the maintenance portion of the relationship- is borne by the tenant in lieu of the landlord (whose property presumably commands a lower market rent because of these behind the scenes charges).

Barely Hedged

I cant argue that this agency comes across as a bit ridiculous.

Having said that, the rental market needs more regulating. A fee for check-in and check-out of rental accommodation is reasonable. This is on the condition that the fee goes to an independent third party.

The check-in can take the form of an inventory and a document thats compiled listing all previous issues/problems with the accommodation and its furniture/fittings along with extensive photographic evidence of the property. This is then acknowledged by both parties.

A fee of €100 seems fair enough paid by the landlord upon check-in and €100 from the tenant at check-out.

foggy_lad

From my reading of the web page those look like optional services available to tenants who want to ensure they get full deposit back etc but they are basically looking for extra money for doing the job that the LL is paying them for!

cerastes

Barely Hedged wrote: »

I cant argue that this agency comes across as a bit ridiculous.

Having said that, the rental market needs more regulating. A fee for check-in and check-out of rental accommodation is reasonable. This is on the condition that the fee goes to an independent third party.

The check-in can take the form of an inventory and a document thats compiled listing all previous issues/problems with the accommodation and its furniture/fittings along with extensive photographic evidence of the property. This is then acknowledged by both parties.

A fee of €100 seems fair enough paid by the landlord upon check-in and €100 from the tenant at check-out.

Its something that can be done quickly and ticked off from a checklist though, 100 at each end hardly seems right, should be done anyway and it looks like a landlord is possibly paying for this service and then the tenant is too?
100 to check whats on the inventory is there? steep,
Upon checking departing tenant has left whats on the inventory, 100 then
charge 100 for the service already carried out to the next person too??

If the landlord isnt doing it I see how getting it done is a good idea, but not having it done doesnt prevent the tenant getting their deposit back, Its just better for them to be involved really. In fact it seems like its the responsibility of the the person letting the property or at least in their interest to do this as they will need to prove if they are witholding a deposit.

That said, I dont think it will or should be done by an agent for nothing, but they really only need to do it on the departure of any tenant as it will be complete on the arrival of the next tenant anyway.
Id consider it part of a service to get a tenant as the landlord pays steeply for this and usually has very little to show for it anyway. Either doing it upon departure of an existing tenant or if it hasnt been done then, doing it on the arrival of the new tenant (but only once) as a matter of course for being paid to get tenants in.7

Some of the other lesser fees dont seem so unreasonable as you cant expect anyone to maintain a business and its overheads without charging for services which consume time and resources, like getting spare keys cut, replacement leases or the like, although I think they should be charged in line with what it costs to do the work, not just the paper and ink costs but the fact someone has to do it and other aspects of that. They are things a tenant would mostly be able to do at better value themselves.

Barely Hedged

cerastes wrote: »

Its something that can be done quickly and ticked off from a checklist though, 100 at each end hardly seems right, should be done anyway and it looks like a landlord is possibly paying for this service and then the tenant is too?
100 to check whats on the inventory is there? steep,
Upon checking departing tenant has left whats on the inventory, 100 then
charge 100 for the service already carried out to the next person too??

Its not a simple as an inventory. A lot of photo graphic evidence needed. Maybe there will be some duplication of work that could reduce the cost.

cerastes wrote: »

If the landlord isnt doing it I see how getting it done is a good idea, but not having it done doesnt prevent the tenant getting their deposit back, Its just better for them to be involved really. In fact it seems like its the responsibility of the the person letting the property or at least in their interest to do this as they will need to prove if they are witholding a deposit.

I forgot to say that the independent third party will hold and release the deposit.

cerastes wrote: »

That said, I dont think it will or should be done by an agent for nothing, but they really only need to do it on the departure of any tenant as it will be complete on the arrival of the next tenant anyway.
Id consider it part of a service to get a tenant as the landlord pays steeply for this and usually has very little to show for it anyway. Either doing it upon departure of an existing tenant or if it hasnt been done then, doing it on the arrival of the new tenant (but only once) as a matter of course for being paid to get tenants in.7

It needs to be independent of the landlord/agent and tenant.

the_syco

Barely Hedged wrote: »

I forgot to say that the independent third party will hold and release the deposit.

Around the time of the bust, I think one of these agencies went down the drain, and the deposits went with them. Not sure what happened in the end, but I'd say the landlords ended up paying in the end.

The_Conductor

the_syco wrote: »

Around the time of the bust, I think one of these agencies went down the drain, and the deposits went with them. Not sure what happened in the end, but I'd say the landlords ended up paying in the end.

Yes- and no records were released to landlords- so most just refunded the deposits in full without question. Where a few tried to argue that the responsibility to refund the deposits rested with the independent holder of the deposits- it went to arbitration- and inevitably the tenant was found not at fault- and the landlord made hand over their deposits.

The lesson of the exercise- is that independent deposit holding companies really don't work. You need a regulated body- who insure the deposits- and have this insurance to fall back on, should their company financials prove insufficient.

Barely Hedged

the_syco wrote: »

Around the time of the bust, I think one of these agencies went down the drain, and the deposits went with them. Not sure what happened in the end, but I'd say the landlords ended up paying in the end.

There were no regulations of regulatory body to supervise at the time.

Setting up a regulatory body, enforcing proper regulations and holding the money in escrow should alleviate the issues.

Of course, regulation doesnt come for free and tenants and landlords will need to pay extra costs. This might come as more of a shock to tenants as theyre conditioned to just paying x amount of rent per month and nothing more. There'll be a little bit of extra administration and cost their side which they wont be used to and the for the landlords it will only be a marginal bit extra paperwork and cost.

daUbiq

jd wrote: »

Jaysus, he plays fast and loose.

http://www.irishlandlord.com/forum/showpost.php?p=13733&postcount=7




http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1983/en/act/pub/0024/sec0084.html#sec84

Who should this be reported to? The garda or an post?

dartstothesea

To slightly come clean: part of my reason for starting the thread was that I had come across this agency while searching for an apartment myself, and they're the managers, probably landlords of it. I was arranging with the outgoing tenants to move in when they leave and after they told me the name of the company they deal with (they hadn't said at first) I researched these guys and I ended up pulling out. I'm now happily moved into another place.

I really hope it makes its way passed along to the agency that this is now a thing that can happen to them because of a reputation preceeding them, even if in the current market it only really means a few days extra of empty apartment between tenants.

Boards.ie: Niamh

An official response from Colm in WMS Ltd - if you wish to discuss this further with him, please contact him at the contact details given below.

Hi all,

Colm here from WMS. Looks like there's been a misunderstanding about the inspection service offered on our website so I'll be sure to add more info to the site in future to help clarify.

This €100 inspection service (landlord or tenant) is only for completely 3rd party tenancies where we do not already charge the landlord the standard letting fee. It is an option for landlords who manage their own properties but want an independent inspection to help avoid potential disputes, or for tenants that want to protect their deposits in case of an unscrupulous landlord.

For ordinary lettings an inspection at move-in, move-out and sometimes during the tenancy is part of the routine and included in our standard letting fee (paid for by the landlord).

The report we produce is a very detailed document and usually takes about 2 hours to produce, excluding travel time to and from the property. It includes a photo survey and written description of every detail of the property; contents, appliances, fixtures and fittings, scratch on the wall etc. The real value in this document is at a PRTB hearing when a dispute arises.

It's no secret we represent landlords and do what is in their best interest, but our website gives a full explanation of why we bill 1.5 months deposit, and some other advice that can give tenants a landlord's point of view. After all, Threshold is a free tenant service and the PRTB is notoriously pro tenant.
http://www.wmsltd.ie/residentials/landlord-resources

What really matters is how our clients / landlords review us, or how good tenants see us. A bad review from a bad tenant isn't something to worry about. It's important to know that bad tenants cost everyone more. They make owning a property more expensive and push rents up for everyone else. So we're proud to be a company that stands up to bad tenants.

As on the Irish landlords forum, advice is free so contact our office if you ever have questions on renting. We're happy to help.

We can be contacted on Info@wmsltd.ie or (01) 677 9696, or at our office: 21 Wicklow Street, Dublin 2.

The_Conductor

On that note guys- I'm closing off this thread guys.
I hope everyone is a little happier- and a little less animated about Colm's perceived business practices- and indeed, he too has learnt from this thread and is going to make the descriptions of these a lot clearer on his website (as they should be!).

Thread closed.