Tenants have moved out without telling anyone.

[chickpea]

OK, here goes.

Our tenants viewed the other property late December and paid the holding fee etc. A week later references were requested.

When the other LA heard nothing, they chased it up and it was at this point our LA emailed us to ask if we would agree an early surrender.

Our LA then told the other LA that he was refusing the reference, as the Ts were tied in for another 6 months.

Ts argued that they hadn't asked for a 12 month AST, and had only signed a 6 month one. Our LA then said he'd have to look into this.

At that point, it came to light that there existed 2 agreements, starting on the same date - one for 6 months and one for 12 months. Neither was lawful because the the page that had been signed by the T had no binding content on it - it was simply a blank page with the signatures of the T and the witness and the date.

Another issue is that the signatures on both the 6 month and the 12 month AST are identical, suggesting that someone in the LA had realised the mistake and simply copied the original signature page and inserted it into the other (12 month) AST.

T goes ballistic, saying he doesn't remember signing 2 agreements. Our LA very quickly agrees to release him, saying that it's fine because he can re-let the property very quickly.

T agrees to pay February's rent - job's a good 'un.

So seemingly, we've been completely shafted by our LA AND we don't have any kind of AST.

[Mortitia]

You do have tenancy as one was implied by the signature on the blank paper attached to the ast and the tenant in his/her naivity accepted that. They took up the tenancy.

That will stand up in a court of law. Agents on the whole are a load of sh***. They have targets to meet and don't care how they do it on the whole. You have been a victim of this -but you haven't lost a large amount of money, or suffered physical harm.

I hate to be dismissive but you are rather playing the drama queen IMO.

Get over it and move on. We have..........

[chickpea]

I'm sorry you feel I'm being a drama queen.

As you say, I'll move on.

Thanks for everyone's help on this.

[Carryon Regardless]

If you have copies of the 2 AST's you should have a claim against the LA.

In this case it seems the T's weren't out to stuff you and maybe, with a polite approach, will assist your claim.

[chickpea]

If you have copies of the 2 AST's you should have a claim against the LA.

In this case it seems the T's weren't out to stuff you and maybe, with a polite approach, will assist your claim.

I believe the LA has copies of the 2 AST's and the other LA has seen them (and possibly has copies).

The other LA is going to contact the tenants and explain what has happened and try to find out whether there has been any other discrepancies - such as whether the rent wasn't actually ever late, but being held onto by our LA, and whether the tenants ever requested the work to the house or whether it was the LA.

[Chestnut]

If I understand correctly, Landlord believes AST (from July) was 12 month, but somewhere along the line Letting Agent changes AST to 6 month, which happens to suit tenant wishing to depart without completing 12 month tie. If LL not consulted for change over signatures - hasn't LA committed criminal offence?

At very least in this instance I would expect existing LA to acknowledge professional misdemeanour, offer apology and offer to find client new tenant without charge.

As I commented on page 1 of thread - issue is with LA, not tenant.

Repeatedly on this Forum new and inexperienced LLs are advised to use LAs. And if Gov - E Pickles (registration) and T May (immigration checks) have their way (not to mention buildings insurers), all DIY LLs will be obliged to use professional agents, however (in)competent they may be.

Heaven help the smaller Landlord!

[chickpea]

If I understand correctly, Landlord believes AST (from July) was 12 month, but somewhere along the line Letting Agent changes AST to 6 month, which happens to suit tenant wishing to depart without completing 12 month tie. If LL not consulted for change over signatures - hasn't LA committed criminal offence?

At very least in this instance I would expect existing LA to acknowledge professional misdemeanour, offer apology and offer to find client new tenant without charge.

As I commented on page 1 of thread - issue is with LA, not tenant.

Repeatedly on this Forum new and inexperienced LLs are advised to use LAs. And if Gov - E Pickles (registration) and T May (immigration checks) have their way (not to mention buildings insurers), all DIY LLs will be obliged to use professional agents, however (in)competent they may be.

Heaven help the smaller Landlord!

It may have been as you describe - or the scenario offered by the other LA is that our LA intended to get the T to sign a 12 month AST but mistakenly gave them a 6 month. At some point between then (July last year) and when the other LA requested references, the mistake came to light and the 6 month was changed to a 12 month (but the 6 month one still kept).

I am not sure if the tenants had both or just one, but they have said they didn't want a 12 month (we were told they did at the time of renewal).

So, our LA let the Ts go to keep them from kicking up a fuss, with the intention of keeping the problem hidden from us by forcing us into a re-let (he told us the only way to get permission to enter the property was to pretend it was for a viewing). He pretended the Ts had bolted without permission, told us he'd refused references, told us we had to mitigate losses and couldn't hold the T to the agreement (otherwise we'd lose any case we might file for unpaid rent due in the remaining months of the 12 month AST) and has tried to push us into accepting the first tenants to apply so that they would be in before any void period might force us to peruse the original Ts.

He sent emails telling us that the Ts were ignoring all calls and emails, but told us any attempt by us to contact them might be construed as harassment.

I'd like to say the LA is a back street, here today-gone tomorrow, two bit outfit, but it's not and we've been paying 10%+vat for the pleasure.

There's no way we're staying with them now, so I guess we will have to ask them to pay the re-let fee and possibly any void period caused by changing agents?

[Richlist]

The agent might object / refuse any claim you make on them and you may end up deciding to go down the county court route. If you do, the problem with this is the time & effort required by you to pull together /produce evidence to support your claim & your need to rely on your ex tenants and their new lettings agents to provide evidence in support of said claim......something that may well NOT be forthcoming.

Perhaps it might be wiser to just make a polite request in line with Chestnut's suggestion and if refused then the threat of county court action might spur them into making you an offer. Either way you may get nowhere without considerable effort.

[chickpea]

The other LA is more than happy to assist - I've already talked to them at length and they also passed me onto the referencing person who was also very informative and offered to contact the tenants.

I think we will make a written complaint via the CHP and see what happens.

I've dug out our copy of the AST (sent by email and only received in mid November) and it's for 12 months.

If the LA has released the tenants under the 6 month AST, do we still need a surrender - or have they given a month's notice? Presumably a surrender would be a good idea anyway?

[Richlist]

If the LA has released the tenants under the 6 month AST, do we still need a surrender - or have they given a month's notice? Presumably a surrender would be a good idea anyway?

As I understand it, the original AST, which you have a copy of, was for 12 months and the 6 month AST is suspected to be a forgery.

If so, then I think that getting a surrender signed would be a good idea and allows you to move on and relet asap.

[chickpea]

Found our copy of the AST, which is for 12 months and signed by the tenants. However, the referencing department of the other LA said both the 12 month and 6 month ASTs had been witnessed by someone in our LA, but the copy we have was witnessed by someone unrelated (a workmates of the T, at a guess).

[Carryon Regardless]

Did the LA charge you for setting up this continuation of tenancy ?

I think you need to be open minded to some possibly not correct statements. Your present La is clearly bad, the T's new LA doesn't owe you loyalty but may be hoping for your business.

Work with what you can see to be true, the rest might be just confusion.

[chickpea]

Did the LA charge you for setting up this continuation of tenancy ?

I think you need to be open minded to some possibly not correct statements. Your present La is clearly bad, the T's new LA doesn't owe you loyalty but may be hoping for your business.

Work with what you can see to be true, the rest might be just confusion.

No charge, if my memory serves me correctly.

You make a valid point, Cor - I'm in no doubt that the other LA may be just as money grabbing as ours, having got a whiff of a new client.

We will stick to the facts in any complaint - that is, that we have a signed 12 month AST and the LA agreed to end the tenancy without our permission, and has lied to us about doing so.

[chickpea]

Spoken to our LA this morning.

He denies any wrong doing, and claims that only a 12 month agreement has ever been drawn up - and suggested that the 6 month one has been falsified by the tenant.

[Carryon Regardless]

Didn't you say that was witnessed by someone in his office ?

[chickpea]

Didn't you say that was witnessed by someone in his office ?

I've clarified this this morning - the space that is left to be signed by the landlord (or his agent) was signed in our absence by someone in the office.

The issue seems to be that all copies of the agreements are scanned copies - no-one (other than the tenant, presumably) has a copy with an original signature on it.

The idea that the tenant has knocked up a 6 month agreement himself seems laughable to me.

The referencing department of the other LA has told me categorically that our LA agreed that there was 2 agreements on their computer and that they would have to get their IT people to verify when they were entered onto the file. When this proved to be impossible, the LA gave verbal agreement to release the tenants at the end of this month.

When I put this to our LA, he strongly denied that this had ever happened. However, all he can show is that there IS a 12 month contract and while he is now asserting that the tenant has agreed by email to pay rent until a new tenant is found, he is also saying that by marketing the property last week, we may have jeapordised our right to assert the 12 month agreement.

In all honesty, I'm not sure who to believe.

I cannot see what possible reason the other LA - in particular, the referencing department - have to give me false info. They have the tenant on their books - their work is done.

On the other hand, if there has actually been an almighty mess up by our LA, he has every reason to try to cover up what's happened.

If he really believed that the tenant had falsified a tenancy agreement, surely he wouldn't just be telling me that that was none of his business and not for us to worry about?

If the tenant ever gets taken to court by us for unpaid rent, surely he'll just wave the 6 month contract and that will be that?

Or if we could then wave the 12 month agreement in response, surely a court would find in our favour - in which case, why is the LA now worrying that that wouldn't be the case?

I'm sorry if anyone thinks I'm "playing the drama queen" here, but it seems to me to be actually important to try to find out what's going on - not least because it plays a big part in how we will decide whether to manage the property ourselves from now on.

[Carryon Regardless]

First to cover your back the property is better surrendered. As long as you have good reason to believe it has been the documentation isn't strictly necessary but would certainly remove any chance of a claim against you later.

If your T's have gone and have no wish to return then providing this shouldn't be an issue. Of course they may negotiate your releasing them from responsibility in return.

Re marketing the property doesn't release the T's from responsibility, Re renting would somewhat. You are better with the property re let anyway, as soon as.

Just cover your back before signing in a new T.

With the property safely re let then consider who to go for to compensate your losses, if it's worth the effort.

Developing the evidence is useful of course.

The fibbing LA must be history so it's just deciding if you wish to trust another LA or do it yourself.

[Richlist]

I've clarified this this morning - the space that is left to be signed by the landlord (or his agent) was signed in our absence by someone in the office.

In my experience, thats normal practice and shouldn't present problems for anyone.

The issue seems to be that all copies of the agreements are scanned copies - no-one (other than the tenant, presumably) has a copy with an original signature on it.

Now that is very unusual. Normally the LA would keep the master/ original on file. Its the tenants(s) & the landlord(s) who get copies. If the LA has allowed the original to leave the office that is extremely bad practice.

The idea that the tenant has knocked up a 6 month agreement himself seems laughable to me.

I agree.......its almost beyond belief.

Personally I'd discount that suggestion unless proof/ evidence can be produced.

[chickpea]

I've clarified this this morning - the space that is left to be signed by the landlord (or his agent) was signed in our absence by someone in the office.

In my experience, thats normal practice and shouldn't present problems for anyone.

The issue seems to be that all copies of the agreements are scanned copies - no-one (other than the tenant, presumably) has a copy with an original signature on it.

Now that is very unusual. Normally the LA would keep the master/ original on file. Its the tenants(s) & the landlord(s) who get copies. If the LA has allowed the original to leave the office that is extremely bad practice.

The idea that the tenant has knocked up a 6 month agreement himself seems laughable to me.

I agree.......its almost beyond belief.

Personally I'd discount that suggestion unless proof/ evidence can be produced.

Thanks for your reply.

So, at this point it would be really helpful to clarify a few points regarding issuing AST's and timescales etc.

The initial AST agreed when the T' s took on the property ran from January to July 2013.

We were then informed that the T' s had requested a new 12 month AST.

However, if the emails the LA has now forwarded me are the only emails that exist, the T didn't sign and return (by scan) the agreement until November. Certainly, we were sent a copy of the signed 12 month AST on November 1st, requesting us to sign it and return a copy to the office.

Is this acceptable practice?

There is something odd about the email attached to the signed copy from the tenant - he requests that the LA replies to his home email account regarding the renewal date, and finishes by saying, "I would also like to take this moment to thank you for the opportunity to work in partnership with you."

Conveniently, our LA has omitted to include the email from himself that the Ts email was in response to.

Odd, or not?

[Richlist]

Is this acceptable practice ?

I have never experienced an LA operate in the way that yours has ie sending out an original AST for signature, accepting back a scannned copy only, accepting a 4 month delay in its return, asking a landlord to sign an AST 4 months late etc. So, to me its unacceptable practice and certainly not the way I would expect my LA to operate. Perhaps other LA's operate this way so it is not uncommon......you need other responses to decide.

Is your rental property and your home location all in reasonably close proximity to the LA ?

If so, why could everyone not just go into the LA's office to sign the original AST ?

[chickpea]

Is this acceptable practice ?

I have never experienced an LA operate in the way that yours has ie sending out an original AST for signature, accepting back a scannned copy only, accepting a 4 month delay in its return, asking a landlord to sign an AST 4 months late etc. So, to me its unacceptable practice and certainly not the way I would expect my LA to operate. Perhaps other LA's operate this way so it is not uncommon......you need other responses to decide.

Is your rental property and your home location all in reasonably close proximity to the LA ?

If so, why could everyone not just go into the LA's office to sign the original AST ?

Our home is 2 miles from the LA (we pass the LA twice a day on the school run) and the BTL is a further 2 miles or so - so Ts no further than 5 miles from LA...as you say, hardly an unreasonable distance to ask all parties to travel.

It's the delay in issuing the AST and the working in the Ts response that makes me wonder whether there WAS a previous AST sent to the T, or that he tried to dispute the renewal date, since it was issued so long after the previous expiry date.

[chickpea]

Actually been in direct contact with the tenant today.

According to him, he approached the LA concerning the 2 ASTs, and, quote, "that's when it all kicked off". LA stopped returning calls etc, didn't respond to requests for references for the new property. Eventually, LA agrees that it's not clear which tenancy would stand in a court of law, so agrees that T should pay until the end of February (by this time, it's moving towards mid January) in order to allow LA to re-market the property. LA then does nothing about re-marketing...T responds by withholding rent to force the issue with LA - hence, LA suggesting that he stick the property on Rightmove and pretend he has a viewing, in order to get T to communicate and pay rent.

T is told by LA that it could possibly be a few days into the next rental period before a new tenant is found - T agrees that he's happy to pay a couple of extra days - hence LA pushing for us to re-let asap, in order to cover up what he's done.

Finally, it all fits. T has emailed his copy of the 6 month AST - it all looks perfectly above board (other than the fact that the signature page is IDENTICAL to that of the 12 month agreement we were emailed).

T has also now informed us that the work that has been carried out to the property by contractors arranged by the LA since the T has lived there is shockingly bad, so now we need to get in and have a look at that too.

[chickpea]

Just an update:

Turns out T is a head case.

He appears to have forged the 6 month AST and made false claims that the LA agreed to release him from the tenancy.

Today, he has sent an email to the LA, claiming to have a recording of a phone call between himself and my husband, during which my husband is supposed to have said that it's all done and dusted and we are "actively stopping looking for new tenants". He also claims to have an email from us, in which we say that we will arrange for the return of the deposit this week.

Neither exist.