“… a hell of a journey, or a journey through hell?...”
1 Star Review
Jul 25,2020
By:
'Matthias'
Jul 25,2020
Branch: Hertford, 70 Fore Street
Services: Lettings (as a Landlord)
Rent PCM: £1400
Would you recommend?: No
Postcode: SG14
Branch: Hertford, 70 Fore Street
Lettings (as a Landlord)
Rent PCM: £1400
Postcode: SG14
2
people found
this helpful
When entering my second one-year managed let agreement with Stephen Oates (SO), I did so following their claim that they have taken references and that my tenant was employed FT by Enfield Council (point 1).
But SO repeatedly refused to share the references with me, which made it impossible for me to insure myself against loss of rent (point 2).
10 months in, I received confirmation from another agent that my tenant was in fact receiving council benefits from Hertford Council. When I asked, Enfield Council stated that my tenant had never been employed (point 3).
My tenant had breached 38 contract clauses, perhaps more, keeping of pets, refusing access to investigate and rectify damages she had caused (kitchen appliances, floors, walls, kitchen worktops, etc.), exchanging the front door without permission, changing the locks without asking (point 5).
Despite my encouragement, SO never supplied any evidence that would suggest that they made any effort to reign the tenant in, and make her aware of her responsibilities. (point 6).
SO lied about the repairs of damages. Although SO had claimed that it had been repaired, an external pipe kept leaking for months on end, after the tenant had failed to turn off the stop cock during freezing temperatures (point 7).
As a result, the patio was damaged (point 8), leading to repair costs in excess of £1,000.
The tenant became a sitting tenant who refused to pay rent for 5 months, until I got her evicted through court order (point 9). SO did little to support the latter (point 10). Instead I had to engage an agency and a representative at my own expense.
SO carried out the checkout inspection prior to removing furniture which the tenant had left behind, and without cleaning the property, which they should have done at the tenant’s expense. A range of damages were overlooked (point 11). SO tried to charge me for their checkout inspection despite the fact that this was money they were owed by the tenant.
I had to contact the DPS multiple times to find out that SO had made false claims in regards to the process (point 12).
Bottom line is that I was left with £7,675.10 damages in lost rent (point 9), and after deducting around £2K for costs covered through insurance, an additional £2,451.38 damages to the property (point 13). These sums were in addition to damages amounting to £1,1672.00 which I managed to recover through insurance.
No less than 79 % of the deposit was withheld by SO, after they claimed the full amount from the DPS (point 14) for reasons which remain unexplained.
In relation to my first year of working with SO, I would like to share that my shares of the rent were disseminated frequently with delay, and the agency tried to withhold the last month worth of rent altogether (point 15). Only after requesting the transfer of outstanding funds five times in a row, did they pay — no less than 13 months after the funds had been due. These are the facts, and I shall leave it there. I have documentary evidence for all the points mentioned above.
2
people found
this helpful
Was this helpful?
Yes