STAY CONNECTED!
    
newsletter-button

TODAY'S OTHER NEWS

ValPal
Tenant's mammoth dispute with agency over fees and redress

A former tenant is the subject of a major investigation by a London newspaper after she claimed to have spent eight months attempting to get fees returned by a letting agency which has appeared in court in connection with alleged fees and redress offences. 

Marta Cremades moved in to a property in Stoke Newington, north London, last October but said she was unable to stay because of noisy fellow-tenants in the building, and because of a mice infestation. 

The Hackney Citizen newspaper says she complained to her lettings agency, London Corporate Apartments, but the problems remained unresolved; she moved out in mid-December despite having a tenancy running to October 2018.

Cremades, seeking the return of her £759 tenancy deposit, has been offered £699 by the company according to the newspaper - an offer that occured after the paper brokered a meeting between agent and tenant. 

Speaking to the Hackney Citizen, Cremades says: “I felt very under pressure to accept the partial return of my deposit, given the length of time this nightmare has been going on. The whole thing has been unbearable, and I just wanted it to end.”

She is reported to have paid over £2,500 in agent’s fees, a deposit and two months’ rent, but spent only seven nights in total at the house, staying with friends the rest of the time.

The newspaper alleges that at the time of her tenancy, London Corporate Apartments was not signed up to a redress scheme; there appears to be uncertainty over whether the agency subsequently joined the Property Redress Scheme, one of the three approved redress operators. 

The newspaper also reports that earlier this year a judge dismissed London Corporate Apartments’ appeal against a £5,000 fine imposed on it for failing to list their fees, as required under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

The judge also awarded costs of £2,700.00 against London Corporate Apartments Ltd to pay for Tower Hamlets Council’s defence of the case.

Tower Hamlets Council issued a penalty of £5,000 against London Corporate Apartments Ltd later the same month - March - for failure to belong to a property redress scheme as required under the Redress Schemes for Lettings Agency Work and Property Management Work (Requirement to Belong to a Scheme etc) (England) Order 2014.

London Corporate Apartments Ltd has appealed but the Hackney Citizen says a date for the hearing has not yet been set.

Letting Agent Today has contacted London Corporate Apartments seeking its comments on the allegations.

  • Kristjan Byfield

    'She is reported to have paid over £2,500 in agent’s fees, a deposit and two months’ rent' - unclear as to what 'fees' she has actually paid. £759 appears a very low deposit for a self-contained flat anywhere in London however if this is accurate and rent is around the same then agency fees were around £1,000- or did she paid £2,500 PLUS rent & deposit? Staggering either way but a worthy distinction!
    Also- why isnt she disputing the deposit matter through the applicable scheme which would have ruled and allocated funds long ago? Am I missing something here?

    icon

    The way I read it, the £2500 was for the fees, deposit and 2 months rent.

    If the deposit was a months rent, she paid £2277 for deposit and rent and £223 in fees.

     
  • icon

    I agree with CR. So she is out of a tenancy as it seems she was somewhat irritated by the problems in the house. She MUST have looked at the house first and could easily have seen vermin droppings. The agent should have been in the appropriate schemes so on balance they got what they deserved as did Marta.

icon

Please login to comment

imgcollapse
sign up