Richlist Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 http://www.landlordtoday.co.uk/news_features/ARLA-calls-for-all-landlords-and-agents-to-be-regulated Seems some agents have the reputation of being 'wheeler dealers' ?......surely not ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grampa Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 http://www.landlordtoday.co.uk/news_features/ARLA-calls-for-all-landlords-and-agents-to-be-regulated Seems agents have the reputation of 'wheeler dealers' ?......surely not ? Dont call me Shirley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grampa Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 They of course have a vested interest because they will see a load more cash in their coffers.. They don’t mention Nals which is also regulatory body, strange that. My agency was a member a Arla about 4/5 years ago and what I came across: 1 I had to be interviewed in London as part of the membership and they stated our AST's weren’t good enough which was fair enough and in hindsight they were correct they were very basic. We replaced them which was a membership requirement but no one checked once. 2 The fees were outrageous in my view and I kept being asked for extras. 3 I had to pass the competency exam as it was a requirement of membership that at least one member in the office was qualified but no one from Arla ever checked I still worked for the agency. 4 The competency exam I passed was changed to something else which would have meant taking more exams (with fees paid to Arla) to stay a member. 5 I found the help line very slow. 6 I only ever got one extra client due to being a member though I spent over 4 figures in membership. exams, courses, extra insurances. 7 Another agency close to me had one qualified member covering over 9/10 offices in 3 counties which is against the Arla rules and I got this info off Arla's own website as they list offices and the qualified person. So anyone going to that company could have be getting advice from the tea boy. 8 They don’t appear to police themselves 9 Most landlords have never heard of them and/or know what they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carryon Regardless Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 10 or care. When are they going to regulate tenants, by far the biggest abusers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melboy Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 10 or care. When are they going to regulate tenants, by far the biggest abusers. That was my thoughts as well COR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richlist Posted March 26, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 But I guess apart from those points everything else must have been OK .......so its not all bad news is it ? I don't want to join the cynics club.....really I don't......but, isn't ARLA the organisation that everyone says lettings agents should be a member of ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grampa Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 Sort of. Being a member of ARLA means you have certain things inplace and done certain training but why should you have to be a member of ARLA to have those things. At present it is a legal requirement for estate agent to be a member of the ombusman and that is enforced by trading standards. It is also a requirement for LA & EA to sign up to the data protection registry.both these organisations are in the public domain and anyone can check if their agent is a member. Why cant it be made a requirement for a agent to have passed a certain exam and it made a legal requirement in the same manner as solicitors. The same for certain insurances. This could easliy be policed by other agents if the all the registrys are in the public domain as they will be dobbing their rivals in if they are not listed. Also T/Standards could check from a desk with a PC. Or for a small fee yearly say 50/100 quid a organisation collects the required info and then listed the agents and the penalties for trading without them in place made severe enough to deter most of the dodgy ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chestnut Posted March 27, 2013 Report Share Posted March 27, 2013 All Landlords? There should be a minimum property number. There must be 1000s of landlords who let a property or two because inherited, temporarily living elsewhere, can't sell, etc. These landlords are not running a letting business for their main income. How much clout do these associations actually have when there is a problem? Aren't there already plenty of laws governing how to let, whether it's one property or many? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richlist Posted March 27, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 27, 2013 I support any proposal that is likely to be a disincentive to landlords and that promotes their dissappearannce from the industry. Less competition, fewer properties = increased rents, smaller voids and more profit. Whats the problem ?......seems OK to me ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carryon Regardless Posted March 27, 2013 Report Share Posted March 27, 2013 The problem is that these career bureaucrats are continually picking on the same targets and directly and indirectly are eroding profits. The good they do is minimal, if any, but they can now say to the media how they cleaned up a dirty industry. If they really, really wished to clean it up they might put effort into preventing the legalised corruption enjoyed by tenants. Let's face it anyone spending time on this forum would have to be blind to not recognise how obvious and widespread that is in practice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivyellentaylor3 Posted April 5, 2013 Report Share Posted April 5, 2013 I was recently at the ARLA Conference and Exhibition in London and all the ARLA members (total boys club) were extolling the virtues of their organisation over their 'lesser' competitors like NALS and UKALA. I accept that minimum standards are necessary but letting out and managing properties is not exactly rocket science is it? The letting agent I use in London for example (www.thamespropertymanagement.com) is a member of UKALA not ARLA and they are perfectly fine. I am sure the fees that ARLA charge to agents (as mentioned earlier in this thread) do inflate the fees that letting agents have to charge landlords like me in order to cover these costs!! I am reminded of Charlie Chaplin`s 'Modern Times' My view is that estate agency is a jumped up 'profession' anyway, and that if, as landlords, we can find straight forward/accredited letting agents for sensible fees, who can deliver all the basic requirements...then go with them and keep our overheads down IvyEllenTaylor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richlist Posted April 5, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2013 My view is that estate agency is a jumped up 'profession' anyway, and that if, as landlords, we can find straight forward/accredited letting agents for sensible fees, who can deliver all the basic requirements...then go with them and keep our overheads down Totally agree BUT its a big issue for: 1. New landlords looking for their first agent. 2. Anyone looking to change agents. The best way of finding a good agent is though RECOMMENDATION. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mortitia Posted April 5, 2013 Report Share Posted April 5, 2013 ARLA do not regulate themselves very well in my opinion. Agree with all said above - it is a big boys club (or girls club) and a money making machine for those at the top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.