New property management agents therefore new lease? Why?!

theotherjd

Ok ...

So I received a letter from the (apparently) new property management agents dealing with the apartment I rent.

"Dear Mr. X,

I am writing to inform you that as of *date* Blahblah Property Management has been appointed Property Management Agents of the property you are leasing from your landlord Mr. Y.

This does not affect your tenancy in any way, but we are writing to ask you to contact our office to meet with us and arrange signing a new lease.

...

Yours, etc."

Why should the fact that a new Property Management Agent has been appointed require that I sign a new lease?

Maybe I'm being a bit paranoid here, I fully acknowledge that I'm not that well up on tenancy law etc., but this makes my bump of trouble itch!

Anyone able to suggest what's going on here? ... or allay my fears and tell me this is normal and I'm being silly? :-)

Thanks.




May be useful background:
- The current lease was originally signed in 2010 for a 12 month period, and the tenancy simply continued thereafter
- It was with the actual landlord, there has been no PMA up to now

Ms Doubtfire1

ignore it unless the 6 years in your current tenancy under further part 4 are up and you haven't given notice of further tenancy to your landlord.
Furthermore I would contact the LL.Whilst it doesn't effect you HE will be forced to fork out a fee for the new lease.

Baby01032012

6 year tenure for new tenancies...still 4 for existing...so when second Part IV ends in 2018 they can terminate. However to get back to the OPs question...you dont need to sign new lease...Your in your second part iv...nothing they can do...simply tell them that...no need for worries or contacting landlord etc,

4ensic15

It could well be a receivership. Tell them nothing!

mrslancaster

genuine question here guys - if the original lease was signed with LL & now he is using an agent maybe there's other paperwork to be signed eg bank mandate

theotherjd

4ensic15 wrote:

It could well be a receivership. Tell them nothing!

It's not.

mrslancaster wrote:

genuine question here guys - if the original lease was signed with LL & now he is using an agent maybe there's other paperwork to be signed eg bank mandate

The letter also contained full details (BIC / IBAN etc.) regarding change of payment.

In any case, that wouldn't explain why they specify that they want a new lease signed ... which is the bit which is causing alarm bells to go off in my head!

Del2005

theotherjd wrote: »

It's not.

The letter also contained full details (BIC / IBAN etc.) regarding change of payment.

In any case, that wouldn't explain why they specify that they want a new lease signed ... which is the bit which is causing alarm bells to go off in my head!

I'd be contacting the LL to confirm that they have hired an agent. Good scam to send a rake of official looking letters to get people to send them money, with SEPA its nearly impossible to get the money back it has to be sent back.

Signing the new lease will have no impact as you are in Part 4, so if you sign no matter what is in it you still have the Part 4 till it ends. You can't sign away your rights.

Graces7

Del2005 wrote: »

I'd be contacting the LL to confirm that they have hired an agent. Good scam to send a rake of official looking letters to get people to send them money, with SEPA its nearly impossible to get the money back it has to be sent back.

Signing the new lease will have no impact as you are in Part 4, so if you sign no matter what is in it you still have the Part 4 till it ends. You can't sign away your rights.

I thought a fixed term lease trumped part 4 rights? I would not be signing anything as there is no need.

4ensic15

Graces7 wrote: »

Del2005 wrote: »

I'd be contacting the LL to confirm that they have hired an agent. Good scam to send a rake of official looking letters to get people to send them money, with SEPA its nearly impossible to get the money back it has to be sent back.

Signing the new lease will have no impact as you are in Part 4, so if you sign no matter what is in it you still have the Part 4 till it ends. You can't sign away your rights.

I thought a fixed term lease trumped part 4 rights? I would not be signing anything as there is no need.

They want a lease signed so they can register the letting and prove when the tenancy started.

theotherjd

See first post, a lease was signed in 2010 (and it was registered, I have the letter from the PRTB).

4ensic15

theotherjd wrote: »

See first post, a lease was signed in 2010 (and it was registered, I have the letter from the PRTB).

The registration expired in 2014. Was it re-registered?

mrslancaster

4ensic15 could you explain what that means in practical terms please?

if the LL does not re-register then he has to pay interest or a late fine but does it make any difference to the tenant if it was not registered again in 2014?

earlier post says the further part 4 kicks in automatically anyway and runs until 2018 so would LL need a new lease because he has the new agent

maybe the rent was not increased in the past so possible that it's a rent review described as a new lease ....?

and do tenants need to sign other types of agreements with general 'house rules' for an apartment complex

any information appreciated thanks

4ensic15

mrslancaster wrote: »

4ensic15 could you explain what that means in practical terms please?

if the LL does not re-register then he has to pay interest or a late fine but does it make any difference to the tenant if it was not registered again in 2014?

earlier post says the further part 4 kicks in automatically anyway and runs until 2018 so would LL need a new lease because he has the new agent

maybe the rent was not increased in the past so possible that it's a rent review described as a new lease ....?

and do tenants need to sign other types of agreements with general 'house rules' for an apartment complex

any information appreciated thanks

Maybe the landlord has been warned about the non-registration and is trying to get a new lease signed and avoid paying a penalty.
Tenants are bound by the house rules automatically under the MUDs Act.

Del2005

Graces7 wrote: »

I thought a fixed term lease trumped part 4 rights? I would not be signing anything as there is no need.

If the OP signed in Sep of 2010 and signs a 1 year lease now they can't be made move in April 2018, their part 4 rights can't be signed away.

theotherjd

The registration expired in 2014. Was it re-registered?

Just checked the letter from PTRB, it's dated June 2015 but gives June 2011* for start of tenancy.

I'm pretty sure I got nothing from them before that.

So he only registered it at that stage?

Or re-registered it at that stage, and they just weren't as good at sending out letters in earlier days?

Sheesh, this stuff is complicated!


* That would actually have been 12 months on from actual start / signing lease.

Victor

theotherjd wrote: »

Why should the fact that a new Property Management Agent has been appointed require that I sign a new lease?

Agents use this to bill unknowing landlords. Also, it means you've made a commitment for a year (you can however assign the lease).

It may be that the agent / landlord don't have the original lease.

It may be that they are trying to change the terms of the lease, e.g. introduce a break clause.

Note that they are stuck for the moment with rent increases of 4% per year.

theotherjd

So Victor and all (and thanks to all for responses), am I right in thinking that the general consensus is that I don't need to sign a new lease / would probably be better off not doing so?

Paulw

There is no reason why you should sign a new lease. You are already covered under Part IV tenancy. But the decision is yours.

TheDoc

Del2005 wrote: »

I'd be contacting the LL to confirm that they have hired an agent. Good scam to send a rake of official looking letters to get people to send them money, with SEPA its nearly impossible to get the money back it has to be sent back.

Signing the new lease will have no impact as you are in Part 4, so if you sign no matter what is in it you still have the Part 4 till it ends. You can't sign away your rights.

One of the big selling points of SEPA is the retrieval process. You just complete a simple form with your bank and any payment made via SEPA is refunded in full if claim is made within 14 days or something, with no questions asked.

Have done it with companies/suppliers who took payment but didn't follow through.

Incredible the misinformation that spreads around this forum : / One of the corner stones of the SEPA system was tackling refunds and cancellations of services to make it easier for the consumer.