x

Ajay Jagota

4899 Profile Views

About Me

my expertise in the industry

Ajay's Recent Activity

The reputational damage extends to the sector as public will, and do, tar everyone with the same brush. Insurance cover totalling £632,185 for Rent, Damage and Legals http://www.dlighted.co.uk/lettingestate-agent/ is better than the current cash alternative soon to be capped at 4 weeks, and eradicates cash from the process.

From: Ajay Jagota 20 October 2017 10:37 AM

Hello Tracey, all information is publically available as it comes from news reports in places like LAT and elsewhere. If you'd like to see our workings please send an email to info@dlighted.co.uk and we'll be happy to send them through.

From: Ajay Jagota 20 October 2017 10:29 AM

1. yes you can - you pay for the initial rental - what happens if you don't take it back? 2. comparing the worth of property and cars is irrelevant they are both assets one is movable representing greater risk yet they still use insurance? 3. Causing 60K of damage is no good if you've only taken 1 months cash deposit, yet with an insurance policy that covers you for 6 weels damage, rent and legal is a lot more effective at recouping the costs. 4. that is the consumers choice and a choice we all make when hiring a car? 5. "lots' of people should not be inhabiting a property only those on the AST? up to 4 people excl driver can inhabit a car as passengers! 6. it is the car hire company who ensure the insurance and the driver complies? Once upon a long time ago, car hire companies used to take cash deposits to indemnify the risk but not now they don't. All the above shows why the direction of the market is heading towards insurance - but ultimately its the market that decides!

From: Ajay Jagota 17 October 2017 15:39 PM

A couple of notes: 1. It has taken the various deposit schemes the best part of 10 years to come up with "passporting"! 2. Next time you hire a car, ask yourself why the car hire company don't ask you for a cash deposit to mitigate the risk of damage and instead utilise an insurance policy?

From: Ajay Jagota 17 October 2017 14:59 PM

FYI mydeposits is jointly owned by the Hamilton Fraser Insurance (HFIS plc) and the National Landlords Association (NLA).

From: Ajay Jagota 20 September 2017 06:46 AM

Currently, you can only access publicly available data once a CCJ or bankruptcy order is registered it is shared with all agencies. It is only subjective as current references cannot see a full credit report i.e. what credit agreements an individual has, amounts, payment/default history etc. which would allow an objective view of an individuals financial conmmitments!

From: Ajay Jagota 14 September 2017 11:13 AM

Any "credit checks" by an agent or reference agency can only access publicly available data from the credit agencies like equifax, therefore any financial check is heavily reliant on a manual subjective process.

From: Ajay Jagota 14 September 2017 09:28 AM

re: assured shorthold tenancy deposits. The comments highlighting the current issues with cash deposits. If the proposal is to increase the level of deposits taken this would result in over £7 Billion held in cash deposits!!

From: Ajay Jagota 23 August 2017 08:43 AM

March 2016 figures show £3.7Billion

From: Ajay Jagota 27 July 2017 13:37 PM

Indeed, and perhaps revisit once the one-month deposit cap in place.

From: Ajay Jagota 27 July 2017 13:18 PM

"A couple of years back" an insurance product or anything similar did not exist? Nobody is suggesting that tenants pay no deposit and exonerate themselves from the responsibilities, but I do suggest an insurance based model is better suited for all stakeholders. www.Dlighted.co.uk No other sector takes a cash deposit from a consumer to mitigate risk?

From: Ajay Jagota 27 July 2017 10:14 AM

1.Insurers pursue the claims under subrogation. 2. Currently claims frequency is 2% which is less than cash deposit. 3. Claims history and no cliams bonus recorded identifying a trusted tenant scheme

From: Ajay Jagota 27 July 2017 09:20 AM

We had requested under the FOI a list of the organisations who hold these deposits after cases reported in the media highlighted that some organisations in administration, disolved or disappeared that the deposit monies they held had disappeared. Quoting from the 14-page report "It is true that tenancy deposit protection schemes are not regulated by the FCA (as they do not sell insurance)"

From: Ajay Jagota 10 July 2017 08:27 AM

1. Do Tenants fully understand that they pay a non-refundable FEE for the product which (it is my understanding) will be more than the average deduction made from 'non-disputed' deductions? Any fee paid must be fully transparent under FCA regulation under our scheme we make it clear during the process and within our terms and conditions. 2. Do Tenants understand that, despite paying this fee, that the products either place them as financially accountable for the first 6 weeks rent (value) of any claim OR will then mean that a future product will be significantly higher having lost their 'no claims' status? This is explained and documented not only by the agents/landlords but also by ourselves at the start of our process. 3. If a Tenant is (or thinks they are) covered for X damage having paid Y- will they treat the property with less care as it isn't 'their' money on the line? The documentation and statements make it clear to tenants of their obligations under the AST and a claim can be processed by agent/landlord to recover any monies from the insurers who in turn recover claims under subrogation. 4. How expedient will the claims process be and how fair will the payouts be to Landlords? There is a Service Leval Agreement in place to process claims which are evidential based all governed under FCA regulation. 5. Whether they like it or not, these are all insurance products and, as such, should surely fall under all relevant FCA regulations. Whilst Dlighted & Insure Street acknowledge this and have FCA complaint statements on their site- Reposit states nothing of the sort & FlatFair claims it is not insurance. We are FCA Compliant. 6. In what is a crowded marketplace for a test product the question also remains that, when one of these fail (and make no mistake, at least one of them will) what protections will remain in place- especially for the companies not already FCA compliant? Does not apply as Dlighted are FCA compliant.

From: Ajay Jagota 30 June 2017 11:55 AM

Hi Kristjan happy to discuss our product and service, drop me a line at www.dlighted.co.uk

From: Ajay Jagota 29 June 2017 22:28 PM

So DPS answer to tenants moving in the PRS is hand over more money! Never mind it can take up to 3 months to get your cash deposit back! Never mind that in 97% of cases the money is simply handed back! Never mind the fact that £3.5 billion is held in these schemes...

From: Ajay Jagota 31 May 2017 00:15 AM

.. for those resisting change good luck, and for those who embrace change good luck, but only one will survive.

From: Ajay Jagota 26 May 2017 06:46 AM

Time to WAKE up tenants' are consumers just like us all. As a sector "in general", they have been taken for granted for too long and now through technology and new entrants the focus and therefore the power is shifting. Some strategic thinkers in corporations get it and are trialling lots of options (mainly based around tech) focusing on consumers to create a better more inclusive, experience, because remember without them we have no business. I await the usual trolling and torrent of abuse from the usual suspects.....

From: Ajay Jagota 09 May 2017 12:11 PM

Robert, I Agree. I would await the conservative manifesto and if I was betting man, I would suggest you will find it somewhere in there. Conservative manifesto due to be released on 8th May. You may be surprised about the speed that it could be introduced though.

From: Ajay Jagota 25 April 2017 13:05 PM

When you result to name calling you lost any argument you may have! Nobody is forcing you to read articles!

From: Ajay Jagota 12 April 2017 14:52 PM

Perhaps you are unaware of the following: http://www.propertyindustryeye.com/stop-moving-the-goalposts-industry-bodies-attack-government-housing-policy-as-lettings-fee-ban-consultation-is-published/

From: Ajay Jagota 11 April 2017 12:18 PM

As a footnote DCLG have confirmed as part of the "consultation" on banning tenant fees they will also look at tenancy deposits - A possible introduction of a cap and the way they are paid...... Any agents who are holding part of the £2.3 billion in their "client accounts" may need to have a re-think.

From: Ajay Jagota 10 April 2017 08:19 AM

Hello Paul all of the above actions are covered on the policy - on a successful claim you would have been paid directly by the insurers whilst they proceed with a claim against the tenant.

From: Ajay Jagota 28 March 2017 06:29 AM

Hello Paul all of the above actions are covered on the policy - on a successful claim you would have been paid directly by the insurers whilst they proceed with a claim against the tenant.

From: Ajay Jagota 27 March 2017 11:37 AM

Once you understand Dlighted and the platform it is delivered on it covers all your points. Currently, when using cash deposits any tenants causing damage (after ADR) can move on with impunity to the next landlord/agent.

From: Ajay Jagota 27 March 2017 09:59 AM

As you have indicated referencing is crucial to the stability of tenants and the ability to pay a cash deposit is not! The claims frequency on Dlighted is 2% which is less than the claims made against cash deposits. The policyholder has cover against damage, rent and legals, which is more than you have when taking a cash deposit!

From: Ajay Jagota 27 March 2017 09:56 AM

Hello Paul, thank you for your comments however regardless of the "business" I actually believe it is the right solution. A "small" deposit of £700 placed in an HTB Isa or Lifetime isa, comes with the benefit of a government 25% top up grant at the time of purchase. A tenant who genuinely wants to get on the housing ladder is able to save a further £4,000 per annum, and I would suggest a tenant who is planning to get on the housing ladder would take greater care of their tenancy because if not it could affect their credit file! You and others may think the £3.5 Billion currently held in tenancy deposits is a good use of resources, however, I don't, and as a consumer, i wonder how you would react if any other sector adopted cash deposit in their process merely to mitigate risk?

From: Ajay Jagota 27 March 2017 09:24 AM

Agree with Kristjan - 1.If the tenant objected to the deductions why was this not dealt with via ADR process? 2.If the tenant didn't object how were they allowed to pursue a case through the courts as both parties pre-agree ADR is binding? Why has the relevant deposit schemes that "protected" this deposit not commented and explained how this has happened under the current process? Yet another loophole with cash deposits?

From: Ajay Jagota 13 March 2017 16:50 PM

I it worthy to request explanation of "renting is expensive" are they referring to costs involved with entry and movement in the PRS - as we all know deposits account for over 50% of these "costs" - as proven rents have not increased in all regions and I agree the government or at least this housing minister have misunderstood the PRS!

From: Ajay Jagota 03 March 2017 12:31 PM

More enforcement is correct but with the current "insured schemes" agents and landlords can act with impunity until it's too late and the money has gone! What happens if in this case as many others they don't pay - who picks up the tab? The taxpayer! Surely a sytem that allows this sort of behaviour is in need of reform (not further red tape but less through a better sytem fit for the 21st century.

From: Ajay Jagota 23 February 2017 12:39 PM

I'm not so sure without change the insurance sector would be willing to underwrite risk which appears to be so easy to embezzle clients money. The "insured" Tenancy deposit scheme which allows agents/landlords to become custodians without any checks or balances is a recipe for disaster as shown in this and many historical cases. Currently £2.3billion is held in such schemes - who's knows how much of that money has been used/stolen?

From: Ajay Jagota 23 February 2017 07:19 AM

Taking deposits using the "insured scheme" where agent/landlord becomes custodian of the deposit without any checks is all too tempting for some! All of this could and should be avoided but government, whom issue the licence to the operators of these schemes seem to be "asleep at the wheel" once again!

From: Ajay Jagota 23 February 2017 06:52 AM

If the government wanted to think outside the box why not utilise the current tenancy deposits that tops £3.5billion and utilise an insurance policy to mitigate risk and then transfer the deposits into HTB Isas for the renters - gets them saving for a deposit utilising the 25% uplift for those that genuinely want to buy and offers better protection to landlords/agents of utilising a sytem that is regulated by the FCA.

From: Ajay Jagota 06 February 2017 10:14 AM

goverment have tried for decades to get private money from pensions/institutions to invest in the PRS with very little success. The speed in liquidation of such assets has and I suspect still remains their issue.

From: Ajay Jagota 06 February 2017 08:31 AM

....and unless we address the problems that exist in the sector, then expect further government intervention/red tape. I am merely highlighting the current issue to which the sector and associations have thus far have failed to address, although plenty within it know the severity of the problem. The public and media are only alerted when the agent along with the money has gone which is all too late! Our product is indeed an alternative to cash deposits, which is a solution but I'm sure it's not the only one, and as always, the market will decide.

From: Ajay Jagota 31 January 2017 16:12 PM

A credit file is built on the legal definition of credit not any other. As it involves consumers it also has a regulatory responsibility.

From: Ajay Jagota 31 January 2017 12:20 PM

No credit agreements are signed upon taking out an AST - any agreed credit must have a Consumer Credit Agreement, and the provider must be FCA accreditated.

From: Ajay Jagota 31 January 2017 11:12 AM

good point - Why wouldn't you want rents in a custodial environment, after all, it's not the agent's money? We could always wait until further agents who suddenly cease trading and then expose that all the tenancy deposits that should have been protected have gone missing? I would have thought in the current environment where the spotlight is on the sector that self-regulation would be the preferred choice particularly with client money... we could always just let government intervene!

From: Ajay Jagota 31 January 2017 10:14 AM

But it's not credit? Rent is paid in advance?

From: Ajay Jagota 31 January 2017 06:46 AM

http://www.landlordreferencing.co.uk/lifestyle-tenant-referencing/

From: Ajay Jagota 21 January 2017 10:37 AM

I believe one already exists.

From: Ajay Jagota 16 January 2017 18:36 PM

Ssavills are a member of ARLA? How did this pass their annual "audit" - over a FIVE year period?

From: Ajay Jagota 11 January 2017 07:27 AM

my understanding is the proposed ban will be part of a consultation.

From: Ajay Jagota 23 November 2016 06:53 AM

Sally walmsley would you care to share this robust Factual evidence with us all?

From: Ajay Jagota 20 November 2016 07:19 AM

No one will be against it but like many other initiatives that turn into legislation ie mandatory redress schemes (many currently are still not part of a redress scheme) it's the enforceability that's may be questioned!

From: Ajay Jagota 25 August 2016 07:04 AM

We use a deposit replacement insurance and have done for the past 4-5 years and find it has been a real benefit in many areas of the business, USP in marketing, security for landlords, admin, move-in cost for tenants etc etc. Would be grateful of any comments on what other agents thoughts are.

From: Ajay Jagota 10 March 2016 10:34 AM

Perhaps they are not aware of key legislation surrounding deposits? The amount of the deposit should be a maximum of two months’ rent. If the deposit is more than this amount it could in theory count as a premium and may give the tenant an automatic right to assign the lease without the landlord’s consent.

From: Ajay Jagota 13 October 2015 08:48 AM

Breaking News