Hello,

I'm not sure if this is the best place to ask. If not, where is please?

I am looking at renting a room in a shared house (in central Guildford) and have found a place that I am happy with. The advert I responded to (posted on GumTree last week) advertised the room in a shared house with 4 others included the following line:

"£450 all bills inclusive (Gas, Electricity, Water, TV, Council Tax)"

I saw the place last week and have said I am interested.The landlord has emailed me a covering letter and an "Assured shorthold tenancy agreement".

However, on reading, these do not match the advert or what was confirmed verbally.

- The price quoted in the covering letter has gone up to £460pcm.

- In the "Assured shorthold tennancy agreement", is a clause saying:

"Tenant's responsibilities during the tenancy ...
Pay for all gas, electricity, water Council Tax and telephone charges relating to the property that apply during the tenancy."

This to me (especially as its on the piece of paper I am to sign) is a big change to what advertised & verbally confirmed.



I am in the process of writing a (friendly worded) letter querying these points and asking for the contract to be amended, however at this stage I am very tempted to simply walk away given I have red warning lights flashing in my head. Just wondering What other peoples thoughts are on this - especially any other landlords reading this.

In addition, rather than taking a deposit, I am to pay a £120 "Administration Fee" (to cover credit checks etc).
Personally this is fine with me but I just wanted to check that given the recent new rules about landlords having to hold deposits in an approved secure manner, are there any knock-on effects a no-deposit situation may have in the future?


Many thanks in advance,
Fluffy.

Personally this is fine with me but I just wanted to check that given the recent new rules about landlords having to hold deposits in an approved secure manner, are there any knock-on effects a no-deposit situation may have in the future?

The knock-on effect is that you get to keep your hands on your money. No bad thing for you.

As I understand it the new deposit-protection rules only apply where there is a deposit taken. There is no obligation to take a deposit.

The Landlord here may simply have taken the view that commercilly, it's better/easier/cheaper to simply not bother with deposits. They make have balanced on the one hand the risk that something MAY happen which will cost him money if there's no deposit, with the certainty that he WILL incur costs for the new deposit-protection scheme.

Speaking as a Landlord myself, I can see this position may have some merits. The arse-ache of dealing with yet another costly and time-draining bureaucratic entity has frankly little attraction. He may also take the view that if he is dealing direct (there seems to be no agency involved here) with tenants then he can better form a view about their likelihood to do damage etc.

Scrooge

Speaking as a Landlord myself, I can see this position may have some merits. The arse-ache of dealing with yet another costly and time-draining bureaucratic entity has frankly little attraction

It has a lot of merits. If you look at the deposit protection scheme's requirements for making a claim against the deposit you will see that the costs of making a case probably exceed the value of the deposit. So the whole thing is pointless.

Much better to ask for rent a month in advance. Which deals with the biggest risk IME of tenant's 'running off' their deposit after they have given notice.

NeilW

This to me (especially as its on the piece of paper I am to sign) is a big change to what advertised & verbally confirmed.

Unless you have doubts about the landlord I'd initially put this down to carelessness rather than conspiracy. It looks like a clause from a standard AST wording which the landlord has forgotten or simply not thought to amend.

Obviously you need to sort this out prior to committing; I'm just suggesting a possible explanation.

Unless you have doubts about the landlord I'd initially put this down to carelessness rather than conspiracy. It looks like a clause from a standard AST wording which the landlord has forgotten or simply not thought to amend.

Yes, that could be the case. But its also a bit confusing over it being a shared house. I am only familiar with AST as applied to a single property let to a single family unit.

I am not sure how it effects shared property, or if it then comes under houses of multiple occupancy.

JofC

I would think the landlord has made a genuine mistake and sent you the forms for some other property. You should agree that you are both talking about the same accommodation by confirming the address. If there are already four other sharers, then an AST (or something) would be in place right now, so can't see how you could be given your own new AST, amended or otherwise.

In addition, rather than taking a deposit, I am to pay a £120 "Administration Fee" (to cover credit checks etc).
Personally this is fine with me but I just wanted to check that given the recent new rules about landlords having to hold deposits in an approved secure manner, are there any knock-on effects a no-deposit situation may have in the future?

As a landlord, I shall probably do this in future. I've mostly found that the deposit ends up covering the last month's defaulting rent, and consider myself lucky to have got shot of them/he or she relatively loss free! Can't think offhand of any knock-on effects this might have in the future. It will certainly be less of a lump sum for a tenant to find at the beginning. Of course, Agents won't find it so enthralling.

You also need to check that you are only liable for your rent, and not jointly and severally liable with the other tennants rather than for the total rent.

I.e your liable for rent of £450 a month and can't potentially be chased for £2250 pcm if the other sharers don't pay.

The other thing that springs to mind is if the landlord is expecting students (who would be exempt from council tax) he may take a different view if you are the only person who isn't exempt and consequently ends up with a large council tax bill.

Cathview

Hi

Assuming that it it not a mistake;

["Tenant's responsibilities during the tenancy ...Pay for all gas, electricity, water Council Tax and telephone charges relating to the property that apply during the tenancy."]

Isn't this a commitment to the pay the whole bill not just "your bit" if everyone else suddenly leaves?

Bye

Ian