x
By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
Kristjan Byfield
Kristjan Byfield
Co-Founder
26441  Profile Views

About Me

Probably best known as 'the property viking' I've been working in and around property since 2002. A proud letting agent who is incredibly passionate about our industry and the incredible work (most of us) do. I'm incredibly focused on promoting the incredible work (smaller) independent agents do in our profession and the substantial role we play in the marketplace. Bit of a geek when it comes to tech, processes, efficiency, best practice and how to deliver the best possible UX.

my expertise in the industry

Started as a lettings neg in 2002, launched base property specialists in 2004 and grown from there. A huge advocate of professionalism, service and the technological evolution of our sector. Have worked with several companies over the years to design and refine digital products. I later co-founded The Depositary in 2016 launching it to market in early 2020. I sat on the board of the UKPA (UK PropTech Association) 2019-2021 and am currently sat on 'Lettings Advisory Board' for Zoopla. I am also an active and engaged member of TLIC (The Lettings Industry Council) and have sat on action groups focusing on the development of Property MOTs & the adoption of UPRNs.

Kristjan's Recent Activity

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 23 November 2023 09:37 AM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 23 June 2023 11:20 AM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 13 June 2023 10:51 AM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 18 May 2023 10:55 AM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 27 April 2023 11:16 AM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 13 January 2023 12:21 PM

Kristjan Byfield
As always, letting agents and landlords aren’t the enemy- the government is. A single-minded agenda to shrink the PRS whilst failing to deliver housing at a suitable scale and in an affordable way to offer tenants a viable alternative. Supply shrinks (260K properties gone from PRS in the last 7 years & 29 properties a day migrating to short/holiday lets). What has also been quickly forgotten is the suppressed rents so many landlords and agents took over the pandemic. I don’t see these groups defending poor landlords when rents dropped by 30% yet they see fit to demonise them now. Whilst some agents are driving up rents, that is our job- to ensure our clients receive the best possible return on their investment. That said, in our general experience this year, it has been tenants offering way over asking, desperate to secure a home and stop the exhausting house hunt competition. It’s time for these organisations to grow up and start having tough conversations with central and local government and stop attacking Landlords and Tenants. Many of the changes they have campaigned for have resulted in the exodus, and with more changes to come in the form of the RRB, this will do further damage. However, they won’t listen to reason and dismiss warnings as self-interested profit-mongering. I’d argue that they are probably the greatest risk to tenants at the moment- winning column inches but costing tenants choice and driving up costs. Rents will climb further next year, mark my words, and the blame will lie solely woth them and DLUHC.

From: Kristjan Byfield 20 December 2022 12:21 PM

Kristjan Byfield
When it eventually comes through, these organisations will shout from the hilltops about what a dramatic change THEY have made happen. What they won't tell you, or the press, is that this change will, in real terms, change this for somewhere in the region of 3-5%. That's it. 85% of tenants leave by their own volition. Arrears and ASN enforcement will (supposedly) be strengthened. Right to re-occupy & sell will also be protected. However, the Landlords who are scared of what this COULD mean to them. Either intimidated by the hype or fed up of a constant barrage of law and regulations will exit, further reducing supply, making finding a home harder, more stressful and pushing rents even further than they are now. Any attempt to explain the impact of this, and other measures they are pushing for, and how this will largely impact tenants negatively is dismissed as self-interested lies. Sadly, the figureheads will continue to peacock around in the press puffing out their chests and slapping themselves on the back for 'championing tenants'- whilst the very people they proclaim to petition on behalf of will suffer the very real circumstances. For Landlords that stay the course, rents will continue to climb encouraging landlords to expand their portfolios as the sector will consolidate into fewer landlords with larger portfolios. The press has a lot to answer for, carrying their campaign and battlecry with heavy coverage- with little to no attempt to offer balance and context to their claims and proposals. Our government, with Housing Ministers revolving faster than a spinning top, are left floundering, creating click-bait policies to appease the very few with very loud voices.

From: Kristjan Byfield 13 October 2022 10:49 AM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 29 July 2022 13:28 PM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 16 June 2022 11:21 AM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 16 June 2022 11:04 AM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 26 May 2022 11:49 AM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 11 May 2022 13:57 PM

Kristjan Byfield
The reality is that the removal of S21 actually won’t change much. Tenants end over 90% of tenancies- this won’t change. With S8 grounds being strengthened (for Landlords) these will be better/easier to enforce and S21’s used as a ‘simpler’ way to remove a rogue/troublesome tenant- landlords/agents will simply use the intended S8 grounds. The right to occupy & sell will (almost certainly) be protected/enshrined within the new regs as well as the right for banks to repossess (with caveats to avoid abuse). As such, this will likely impact roughly 2% of tenancies (which is still around 80k). Please read Ben Beadle’s recent open letter on behalf of NRLA to Shelter for greater statistical insight- it’s a long(ish) but brilliant read! However, this will likely make landlords and agents be far more cautious about ‘questionable’ tenancies. Where there are concerns over a pet being a nuisance or where the affordability is at the threshold (worsened by rising living costs)- these tenants will likely be shunned for fear of being stuck with them unless they formally breach the contract actionable under S8. Therefore, this will likely impact the very people the likes of Shelter are (supposedly) trying to help & protect. S21 are likely to go until the latter part of this year and it is not unreasonable to think this may only apply to new tenancies going forwards. Rent increases in line with fair market conditions are likely to still be actionable- so concerns over being stuck with a tenant who, after several; years, is paying way below market rate is also likely to be unfounded. As such, this is likely a storm in a teacup and better S8 grounds/framework could actually lead to a better-structured landscape for agents & landlords alike. The white paper will obviously set out more detail, so we are all largely speculating until then, but let’s see…..

From: Kristjan Byfield 11 May 2022 12:38 PM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 24 November 2021 12:07 PM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 12 October 2021 12:04 PM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 26 May 2021 12:37 PM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 03 March 2021 11:32 AM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 28 October 2020 10:46 AM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 24 June 2020 12:34 PM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 02 March 2020 10:59 AM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 18 December 2019 12:49 PM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 04 October 2019 14:09 PM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 12 July 2019 17:12 PM

Kristjan Byfield
Increasing legislation and licensing represents a huge opportunity for agents. 15 years ago fees were similar if not higher (% wise) to now yet your average landlord was lucky to get a signed tenancy agreement and a gas safety certificate. Now an agency can take care of almost every legislative requirement a landlord has- and justify charging fees to do so. It's not an easy sell, nor is it an easy/clean message to convey but once you get it right you will win clients at higher fees. We are very firm on our fees of 12% Let Only and 18% Fully Managed and continue to win clients despite often being in competition with agents charging as much as 1/3 less. Some landlords instantly get our value with others, some need convincing and others we respect their decision but stay in touch safe in the knowledge that some day down the line a cut-fee agent will (probably) slip up and that's when we win them back. I often say 'we are Landlords 1st choice 2nd time round'- that's because landlords often are swayed initially by low fees, local market presence, flashy offices, magazine ads etc but these aren't signs of a quality service- when things go wrong, their requirements change to reviews, awards and associations and that's when we are hard to beat. Likewise, Landlords who have always gone solo are under huge pressure to be compliant and many will find that the value of an agent Vs the risk and cost of regulatory breach hard to argue against and some (at least) will transition across to agency.

From: Kristjan Byfield 04 February 2019 11:52 AM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 10 January 2019 12:44 PM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 14 December 2018 11:31 AM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 30 July 2018 12:56 PM

Kristjan Byfield
What is missed by Miss Whitlock in this article is that not all letting agents operate in London or high rent areas. In London, most agents will do absolutely fine on the fees earned from their clients- our average fee per let is around £2.5k and half that again if we manage it- so very, very viable. What is overlooked in this blanket ban is the impact on the regions where rents (and therefore agency fees) are considerably lower. If you let a property for, say, £600 a month then an agency fee would be typically £600-720 (1 month to 10%) + VAT (I have not included this amount as this ultimately isn't agency revenue)- I know that I certainly couldn't operate a viable, compliant and quality service offering at this low level of income. These agents have to fulfill the same legislative requirements (which are seemingly ever-increasing) for around 1/4 of what we make in London. To continue to survive these agents will simply have to increase charges to Landlords, adding to the tax changes already affecting them not to mention pipeline licensing costs and so much more- and this will result in 1 of 2 outcomes- increased rents or sold property. The sad truth also, however, is that as an industry we have, by and large, brought this on ourselves by too many agents (such as the one that has recently let to Victoria's daughter) being far too greedy and simply charging as much as they can get away with rather than what is fair, legitimate and justifiable. The fee ban will remove around 2% of our revenue but I have heard numerous examples of agents operating at around 16% profit (industry average) with over 20% of earnings through tenants fees- swathes of UK independent agents will close or be acquired in the next 2 years.

From: Kristjan Byfield 30 May 2018 12:26 PM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 28 February 2018 11:55 AM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 18 October 2017 18:39 PM

Kristjan Byfield
The market is evolving and alternatives are great. My 'twitter spat' with Reposit is no secret however, since then, my position has softened for sure. That said, I still have a few major concerns here: 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? 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? 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? 4. How expedient will the claims process be and how fair will the payouts be to Landlords? 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. 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 comanies not already FCA compliant? As both a letting agent of 15 years and a ondon Tenant of 20 years I still believe the (current) regulated Deposit system to be the fairest and most comprehensive process in place for all concerned. I must, however, also admit some 'self interest' in this statement as I am shortly about to launch The Depositary for letting agents in partnership with TDS. I'd be really keen to hear other people's thoughts (especially poeople from the products listed and from large scale lettings agencies) on the key points I've raised.

From: Kristjan Byfield 29 June 2017 16:13 PM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 29 November 2016 11:53 AM

Kristjan Byfield
Surely off the back of this we have to look at becoming a fully regulated and licensed profession. As the government increase SDLT, cut tax efficiencies and now (likely) increase agents costs- Landlpords will still need to make ends meet and, as such, many will have no option but to opt for low fee, low service operators once again plunging our industry back 20 years. The quote of Baroness Olly is actually worryingly worded as she appears, in the phrasing of her comments, to understand this yet seems equally unconcerned by this fact. Interestingly, councils and governments want ever increasing standards yet ever reduced costs. We recently started composing a pitch for Brent council on Letting & Managing a new portfolio for them- until we realised they wanted a full service offering yet their cap was around £500 pa per property. No margins at all and I fear what organisation will secure the job and what service they will be able to deliver under such financial pressures- deepened further by this ruling. High value areas, such as London, will march on largely unaffected (although there will be some agents saying good bye to vast revenue streams) however I fear for the regional agencies who often earn £400-700 to let and even manage a property. With no surplus fees, how will they survive? Will their Landlord be able to supplement a 30%+ rise in fees to accomodate this? Again, another legislative impact on our industry with no comprehensive consultation or apparent understanding of the inner working of our industry and the challenges faced in different areas. Where on Earth have ARLA & RICS been in all of this? Isnt this the very pivotal industry-related matters they should be championing us in?

From: Kristjan Byfield 23 November 2016 11:55 AM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 24 August 2016 10:53 AM

Kristjan Byfield
Perhaps easyProperty should focus a little more on their own operations then attacking others. Latest filed accounts recorded income of just £144k on operating costs of £5.735m (sorry what now?). Why aren't any media outlets reporting/discussing this? Are the investors (especially those duped in to the crowd funding round offering tny equity at exobitant rates) aware of the appalling performance to date? It is all well and good to 'disrupt' an industry but there are few who have proven the financial viability of the online model yet- especially when it comes to Lettings where fees are so much smaller yet so much more legislation and regulation falls upon the agent. I see nothing on their site about Tenant fees (maybe they dont charge any- but surely they would shout this from the roof tops). What is more I see no Redress Scheme on their site- a legal requirement for all! Also, no affiliations with the likes of NALS, ARLA, RICS etc, no sign of SAFEAgent, no mention if CMP nothing. Is this really the way we want our industry going- effectively championing cheap offerings with cheap service leaving Tenants at risk and Landlords accountable? These are the points that need to be discussed and highlighted. I fully support the role of online agents wthin the market place, however, tearing each other down is nonsense. What is essential however is professionalism and regulatory compliance across all sectors. How many Tenants and Landlords are at risk using low cost options that are seemingly in breach of multiple regulations currently in place? Absolutely shocking! For the legitimate online offerings out there, companies like this should be of huge concern as they could cause irreparable damage to the perception and viability of the sector. The more research undertaken (and easy research done in minutes) raises even more questions abut the viable leadership of this enterprise.

From: Kristjan Byfield 01 July 2016 12:01 PM

Kristjan Byfield

From: Kristjan Byfield 08 March 2016 11:11 AM

MovePal MovePal MovePal