x

Rosemarie Douglas

2713 Profile Views

About Me

my expertise in the industry

Rosemarie's Recent Activity

Usually get more info from neighbours or other tenants than police! Shocking that in shared houses police often won't even reveal to the house owner (landlord) reasons for their "raid" or "attendance" nor "who" they arrested.

From: Rosemarie Douglas 29 August 2019 08:56 AM

What is interesting is his "flawed business model" which was said to have been a contributing factor. His agency Real-Est8 only charged landlords £50 a month per property for a tenant finding, deposit and rent collection service. Now the tenant fee ban is imminent landlords will have too pay more.

From: Rosemarie Douglas 27 March 2019 10:29 AM

Angus, other new reports state he was sentenced to 17 months in prison suspended for two years and he has to complete 250 hours of unpaid work. CPS financial investigations failed to find the missing money. Under the Proceeds of Crime Act he has to pay £1 now but the Proceeds of Crime Order stays ‘for life’ or until the debt is repaid.

From: Rosemarie Douglas 27 March 2019 10:23 AM

There is already a suitable term for non-compliant and dishonest landlords it's "criminal". The rest of us do not need a permanent adjective. It is right to drop the use of "rogue" being constantly attached to the noun. For the many good how about describing us as "professional" landlords.

From: Rosemarie Douglas 26 November 2018 09:26 AM

I know of joint property owners (mother and son) both claiming separate £7500 pa for their lodgers. While there is a review of allowance and residency requirement the Government should look at the legality of a multiple claim using the same address.

From: Rosemarie Douglas 16 October 2018 11:31 AM

Second home renters but still exempted from tenant fees if a total ban is introduced.

From: Rosemarie Douglas 11 June 2018 07:58 AM

Succinctly put. Letters to Dominic Raab our new Minister for Housing are needed immediately. As letting agents we're already over-stretched and underpaid and doing many thankless tasks. A total ban on upfront fees is ill-conceived and should not apply across the board. Some tenants rent as a second home and own a main home elsewhere those tenants can easily afford to pay for our services and they expect to.

From: Rosemarie Douglas 10 January 2018 11:58 AM

I fear they have absolutely no idea what , or how much we do for tenants. I agree we will need to implement a raft of new in-tenancy charges to compensate for lost upfront admin fee including a late rent charge and lost key callout. I'll start by charging when I need to put their bins out or remove superfluous rubbish bags (previously done for free.) After tenancy too- redirect your letters and give you a free reference I don't think so!

From: Rosemarie Douglas 08 January 2018 13:12 PM

I welcome this campaign but it come late now the Government seem set on implementing a ban. A cap would have solved the problem they think exists. In reality the problem was only, or mostly, only ever in London. The majority of agents and self-managing landlords only charge their reasonable costs for work done. Why shouldn't we be paid for that? A monetary or percentage limit on what can be charged in fees would be far more sensible. Smaller agencies will struggle to cover expenses incurred in setting up new tenancies. Staff may be lost as a consequence. We will be much stricter with tenants- we will likely no longer consider a shorter than 6 month tenancy which many tenants request (for instance for tenants between house purchases or when relocating new to area one partner travels ahead of family while searching for home). Rent will definitely increase. Incidentally many of our tenants have their own house elsewhere those people are not a vulnerable group needing "protecting", they expect to pay for the service we offer!

From: Rosemarie Douglas 06 November 2017 12:59 PM

Angus, maybe no 5 was related to Q4 part 2 i.e. the level of the cap? Not much notice taken of majority view so all pointless anyway- further emphasising this Government are not listening.

From: Rosemarie Douglas 02 November 2017 14:28 PM

It's ridiculous. Some admin staff will lose their jobs. Tax revenue from agents will go down. So many of our tenants are home owners themselves they are only renting to work in another part of the country they are not vulnerable people. A subsidy for tenants in need (like a FTB stamp duty tax break) would be far better. A cap on maximum chargeable also better. London tenant fee ban only best of all!! More red tape and over-regulation.

From: Rosemarie Douglas 01 November 2017 09:31 AM

The whole encumbrance of leaseholder permission should be reviewed whether acquiring the freehold or not. My leaseholder held me to ransom recently over the price of the "management pack" the solicitor requested to complete a sale for me and for payment of long disputed spurious fees. Another company managing a property I bought have increased their fees by 32% this year and want paying every 6 months each time the AST is renewed. Once I missed the ground rent invoice as they sent it to an address I'd advised them I had left (and not even a copy to the leasehold address nor by email) just "deliberately?" to former address. In no time they had added £400+ extra fees for court and legals to the original £100 demand and attached charge to my mortgage under some little known lease clause enabling them to do so. First I knew I had a CCJ (never before nor since) was when my mortgage company wrote to tell me why my mortgage had increased- HOW COULD THEY DO THAT LEGALLY. Total scam!!!!!!!!

From: Rosemarie Douglas 27 October 2017 08:15 AM

This is sadly not a government that supports or encourages small business or the self-employed.

From: Rosemarie Douglas 07 September 2017 09:28 AM

Government should trial a fees ban inside M25 first- and why not start with Hackney? Fee ban policy will be good for London but not so good outside the capital where many small agents are increasingly dependent on all streams of revenue from lettings including income from new tenancy fees .

From: Rosemarie Douglas 31 July 2017 08:27 AM

Hey Government- here's an idea why not roll out the fees ban in London only. London seems to be a law to itself and the housing market including property prices differs there to the majority of the UK. It would be more appropriate than imposing such fool-hardy and punitive measures on the hardworking agents (and ultimately tenants) in the rest of the country.

From: Rosemarie Douglas 12 July 2017 08:33 AM

All mine are victorian. I can't meet the E rating I've had second and third opinions. People choose to rent these properties- why push them into new builds if that isn't what they want. There have be exemptions or waivers available other than for listed buildings. What about where landlords pay the bills not the tenant such as room lets or short stayers who have their own home elsewhere?. I never had a tenant who cared about the EPC they just wanted a large room with high ceiling- they don't care if its F rated!!!

From: Rosemarie Douglas 10 July 2017 07:56 AM

A thorough consultation is the least the Government should be doing regarding a fees ban considering the full impact this would have on the livelihood and jobs of smaller agents. More checks are required than ever and we have to comply with far more regulation yet we may be told can't reasonably charge for our time- .

From: Rosemarie Douglas 25 April 2017 14:51 PM

Except for tenancies under 6 months which we've always allowed because our low (under £150) start-up fee covers the additional work and dedicated staff member. Without this we'll need to insist on full 6 month tenancies where many tenants only want 8-12 weeks while working away from home and need "all-inclusive rooms" they are happy to pay for. Where services are included and for under 6 months stay fees should still be enabled but capped.

From: Rosemarie Douglas 01 February 2017 09:01 AM

Our one-off low fee (£147) has remained at exactly the same rate for over ten years for those unable to provide a deposit. Cap don't ban or allow a fee where no deposit is taken so overall affordability isn't compromised. To lose "fees" altogether will definitely mean us losing our dedicated lettings staff member and will create an increased workload for our small management team who already work a 50+ hour week. Incidentally Chancellor we pay tax on our fees income have you forgotten that? Rent will have to be increased in the first months for rooms in shared houses to cover for the cost of enabling shorter lets. These have more costly associated "turnaround" work where we provide an inclusive full deep clean plus all new bedding for every let . Short-term stays may now not be an option as we can't recover costs if tenant only wants to rent for anything under 6 months. Finally we really do a lot for our administration, registration, preparation and referencing charge which is clear from the on-sett (including swapping and moving furniture as required, check-in inventory and meet and greet/show around). Other people get paid for their work why shouldn't we? If you are banning fees start with my accountants who are not content with a vast hourly rate plus vat then never fail to add an unquantified an ever increasing amount for "disbursements" to my annual bill.

From: Rosemarie Douglas 10 January 2017 10:32 AM

By coincidence £147 is exactly what our total fees are per tenancy regardless of length of stay.

From: Rosemarie Douglas 10 January 2017 10:16 AM

Breaking News