Here is a question to the blog clinic from Neville who is a tenant
The agency we rented from insisted that all over 18s had to be on the tenancy agreement and therefore charge for a reference check, despite the fact they did not earn. Were they correct?
Answer:
Its not a matter of right or wrong. Its what the agency (on behalf of their client the landlord) require in order to rent the property to you.
After all it is not unknown for people who pass referencing to take a tenancy to provide somewhere for another person to live and then move out leaving that person (who generally does not have a job) in occupation.
So the landlord is left with someone in occupation who is not on the tenancy and cannot afford to pay the rent.
I suspect however that in your case, it is more likely to be an income generation exercise on the part of the agents, as no doubt they make a bit on the reference checks that they do.
However it is not wrong to require all over 18s to be on the tenancy agreement and it is not wrong to do a credit check for everyone on the tenancy agreemen (that I am aware of).
Like you, I am not happy about it. If you want the property though, you will have to put up with it.
If you think the sums charged for the referencing (which should not cost more than about £30-50 pp to do) is excessive you could complain to Trading Standards, or maybe Shelter. However this will not endear you to the agency if you stay there for any length of time.
“It is not unknown for people who pass referencing to take a tenancy to provide somewhere for another person to live and then move out leaving that person (who generally does not have a job) in occupation.”
Does this assume that the person doing this – for somebody else – never meets the landlord, Tessa?
Agent: “The named tenant has left and someone else is living in your property but they’re not paying any rent.”
Landlord: “And you knew they were living there right from the start?”
Agent: “Yes.”
Landlord:”So why didn’t you reference them and insist that they go on the tenancy agreement?”
Agent: “Ummmmmm……”
Guys I think we miss the point here because if someone over 18 is allowed in the property without being on the tenancy agreement then how would you get them out if they decided not to leave even if the original tenants do so as they are not party to the tenancy agreement so they would not be subject to a section 21, I assume they would / could claim squatters rights giving the Agent / Landlord all sorts of problems. I would t let anyone into one of my properties over the age of 18 unless they were on the tenancy agreement its got nothing to do with the agent entering into an income generating exercise , can you imagine what the Landlord would say if the agent didn’t protect his / her interests.
Lets not bash the agent over this.
Someone staying over would not normally get ‘squatters rights’. When I did this work I would generally bring proceedings in the name of the tenants – as they have not given up vacant possession they are still responsible for the property and whose to say they won’t move back in again?
The bailiff has the right to evict whoever he finds at the property when evicting under an order for possession.
You would need to use the squatter procedure to evict the occupier if you have accepted a surrender from the tenant.
The good news for this is that it is a quicker procedure, the bad news is that solicitors tend to charge more for it. The answer is to use my Squatters DIY Kit http://www.evictingsquatters.co.uk/