Administration fee for re-issuing lease - who pays?

biohaiid

Hi,

I am due to move into a room in my friends house from 1st September. Another one of her friends is moving out by that date, so it's a swap. We have notified the landlord & letting agent, who is happy for it to go ahead. I'm required to give my deposit to the girl moving out, and her deposit then becomes my deposit. The letting agent have also said that there is an administration fee of €49.20 for re-issuing the lease with her name removed and my name added, and that we should decide who's liability this is.

None of us has been in this situation before (having to pay an admin fee to re-issue the lease), and we are unsure who should be responsible for paying, or if it should be split, etc.

Thoughts?

omb0wyn5ehpij9

If I was in that position, I'd just split it with the girl moving out

biohaiid

BDJW wrote: »

If I was in that position, I'd just split it with the girl moving out

Ah okay, I wouldn't have thought that.
I think that the girl moving out shouldn't have anything to do with it. The fee is to draft a new lease for a new year with the 3 tenants for that year, so in my eyes that doesn't concern her and I don't think it would be fair for her to have to pay.

I think the fairest thing to do would be for all three named on the new lease to split it equally.

But as I have no experience with this kind of thing, I'm really not sure!

Mrs OBumble

Surely its the propetty owners responsibility? He's theone wjo wants accurate names om the lease.

And i say that as a LL!

Brian201888

biohaiid wrote: »

Ah okay, I wouldn't have thought that.
I think that the girl moving out shouldn't have anything to do with it. The fee is to draft a new lease for a new year with the 3 tenants for that year, so in my eyes that doesn't concern her and I don't think it would be fair for her to have to pay.

I think the fairest thing to do would be for all three named on the new lease to split it equally.

But as I have no experience with this kind of thing, I'm really not sure!

They don't need a new lease they're already named on one so I don't see why they should pay anything

Bigmac1euro

biohaiid wrote: »

Hi,

I am due to move into a room in my friends house from 1st September. Another one of her friends is moving out by that date, so it's a swap. We have notified the landlord & letting agent, who is happy for it to go ahead. I'm required to give my deposit to the girl moving out, and her deposit then becomes my deposit. The letting agent have also said that there is an administration fee of €49.20 for re-issuing the lease with her name removed and my name added, and that we should decide who's liability this is.

None of us has been in this situation before (having to pay an admin fee to re-issue the lease), and we are unsure who should be responsible for paying, or if it should be split, etc.

Thoughts?

Letting agencies making it up as they go by the sounds of it. I’ve never heard of anyone being charged 50 quid to sign a lease what a load of pony.
Tell them to take it from your deposit. F**k that.

dennyk

Send the letting agent an invoice for a €49.20 administrative fee for processing the return of their tenant's deposit for them. Fair's fair, after all. :pac:

Seriously, though, the letting agent works for the landlord, not the tenant; the landlord ought to be responsible for any fees they charge. Tell them to go squeeze the landlord if they want to pull that sort of thing. And in all seriousness, don't do that nonsense with the deposit, either; giving your deposit money to a former tenant does *not* count as a rental deposit (unless you were subletting from said tenant, which you clearly aren't if the master landlord's letting agent is adding you to their lease directly) and you'll have no legal protection when the letting agent goes "But you never gave us a deposit, so we cannot return anything, soz m8!" at the end of your tenancy. You need to give your deposit directly to the landlord or their agent and they need to deal with returning their former tenant's own deposit properly themselves.

Glass fused light

dennyk wrote: »

Seriously, though, the letting agent works for the landlord, not the tenant; the landlord ought to be responsible for any fees they charge. Tell them to go squeeze the landlord if they want to pull that sort of thing. And in all seriousness, don't do that nonsense with the deposit, either; giving your deposit money to a former tenant does *not* count as a rental deposit (unless you were subletting from said tenant, which you clearly aren't if the master landlord's letting agent is adding you to their lease directly) and you'll have no legal protection when the letting agent goes "But you never gave us a deposit, so we cannot return anything, soz m8!" at the end of your tenancy. You need to give your deposit directly to the landlord or their agent and they need to deal with returning their former tenant's own deposit properly themselves.

100% pay the deposit to the agency, if they are charging you 50e let them work for it, (if you still had a chequebook I would attach it to the new lease and let them lodge it in the bank themselves ). The leavers deposit is none of your business don't get involved and have her room and common areas inspected by the agent before moving in so you don't loose your deposit for pre-existing damage. Photos of the place on move in day would also be a good idea.

ted1

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Surely its the propetty owners responsibility? He's theone wjo wants accurate names om the lease.

And i say that as a LL!

I’d be the opposite. There is a cost involved someone has to pay.
If they don’t pay I would t allow them reassign the lease and the other two tenants would be left paying the full rent between 2.

Also I assume that there tenants are giving up thrir part 4, to start a new lease where they could be evicted within 6 months

ted1

steo_magra wrote: »

biohaiid wrote: »

Hi,

I am due to move into a room in my friends house from 1st September. Another one of her friends is moving out by that date, so it's a swap. We have notified the landlord & letting agent, who is happy for it to go ahead. I'm required to give my deposit to the girl moving out, and her deposit then becomes my deposit. The letting agent have also said that there is an administration fee of €49.20 for re-issuing the lease with her name removed and my name added, and that we should decide who's liability this is.

None of us has been in this situation before (having to pay an admin fee to re-issue the lease), and we are unsure who should be responsible for paying, or if it should be split, etc.

Thoughts?

Letting agencies making it up as they go by the sounds of it. I’ve never heard of anyone being charged 50 quid to sign a lease what a load of pony.
Tell them to take it from your deposit. F**k that.

It’s to change a lease. Not to sign a lease. Ring a Car Insurance firm and ask to change your policy, they’ll charge the same.

dennyk

ted1 wrote: »

I’d be the opposite. There is a cost involved someone has to pay.
If they don’t pay I would t allow them reassign the lease and the other two tenants would be left paying the full rent between 2.

Also I assume that there tenants are giving up thrir part 4, to start a new lease where they could be evicted within 6 months

An updated lease is not a new tenancy. The incoming tenant would not have Part 4 rights yet, of course, but the other tenants in the property still would, if they'd been there longer than six months.

Letting agency fees are the landlord's responsibility, as it's the landlord that has a contract with the agency; you'd have no legal basis for demanding that your tenants pay those fees in addition to their rent. Being a landlord is a business; you should be accounting for your expected operating expenses, including agency fees if you decide to use a letting agency, when setting the rent. You could take a hard line and refuse to take on the new tenant if they won't pay the fee, sure, but then you're taking a risk; if the tenancy agreement is per room, you'll be losing out on the rent for that room, or if it's a joint tenancy for the entire property, you may be making it unaffordable for the remaining tenants and you may end up losing them all (or worse, spending a year or more trying to remove them if they decide to stop paying rent and overstay instead of giving notice and vacating). And if your letting agency is charging ridiculous fees for adding a name to an existing lease, I'm sure they'd be charging to bring in new tenants as well, so you'd probably just end up paying even more in the end no matter how it turns out.

GarIT

It's the landlord's job to do it for free. The landlord decided to use and agent so he should pay the agent's fee. Realistically though they don't have to rent to you so you might want to go along with their nonsense.

TheShow

Incompetent agencies creaming it in I see. None of the tenants should have to pay the fee. It’s the landlord that has hired an agency to deal with this stuff, therefore and costs should be billed to the landlord.
Also, pay your deposit directly to the agency and get a receipt. You can’t prove you paid a deposit if you give it to the person moving out.

Graham

so the best way to get a landlord to agree to something they are not obliged to agree to is to ask them to pay for the privilege of agreeing to it?? :rolleyes:

hmmmm

Baby01032012

Some stupid responses on this thread.

It’s not the landlord that’s asking the tenants to switch. If a tenant wants to move out and landlord has agreed to new tenant moving in, then tenant moving in or both tenants switching need to pay the admin. fee.

By the way as it’s not a new lease the tenant moving in, in place of the tenant moving out picks up the previous tenants rights and responsibilities including continuity of tenure, Part IV rights are dictated by the existing lease not by when someone joins the lease.

Graham

Baby01032012 wrote: »

By the way as it’s not a new lease the tenant moving in, in place of the tenant moving out picks up the previous tenants rights and responsibilities including continuity of tenure, Part IV rights are dictated by the existing lease not by when someone joins the lease.

I'm fairly sure that's incorrect. Although it does sound like the OP will secure the rights granted under the terms of the lease from Day 1 of their new lease.

If a tenant assigns a Part 4 tenancy to a person other than a sub-tenant, the protection provided by a Part 4 tenancy ceases. The new assignee will require 6 months of continuous occupation in the dwelling before qualifying for Part 4 tenancy rights.

Have a read of this:
https://www.rtb.ie/media-research/publications/licensees-in-private-rented-accommodation

Baby01032012

Graham wrote: »

I'm fairly sure that's incorrect. Although it does sound like the OP will secure the rights granted under the terms of the lease from Day 1 of their new lease.



Have a read of this:
https://www.rtb.ie/media-research/publications/licensees-in-private-rented-accommodation

That’s where the whole lease is assigned. The lease in question is not being assigned. One person on the original lease is switching. As there are 2 other original tenants the lease is not affected. One name is being added and one taken off. When you think about it how could you have one tenancy with tenants with different notice periods depending on how long they are there.

Graham

Baby01032012 wrote: »

When you think about it how could you have one tenancy with tenants with different notice periods depending on how long they are there.

That's exactly what you end up with.

I think you're confusing lease & tenancy.

Read the example given by the RTB here:

https://www.rtb.ie/media-research/publications/licensees-in-private-rented-accommodation

Baby01032012

Graham wrote: »

That's exactly what you end up with.

I think you're confusing lease & tenancy.

Read the example given by the RTB here:

https://www.rtb.ie/media-research/publications/licensees-in-private-rented-accommodation

No confusion. You’ve linked to a section and example of a licensee. No one here has mentioned licensee. The example given has no similarities to the situation in the OP above.

In the example it was clear that new tenant was coming in as a licensee, spare room landlord not informed, had to agree to accept as a tenant after 6 months. Above OP clearly a tenant is moving out has found a direct replacement which landlord or agent has agreed to, otherwise you wouldn’t have a change in names on the lease.

Baby01032012

Apologies, you are correct.

They need to be there 6 months before they acquire the same part IV rights as the others on the lease.

Graham

It's covered fairly explicitly in the Residential Tenancies Act

RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES ACT 2004

REVISED

Updated to 25 February 2018

Entitlement of multiple occupant to benefit from Part 4 tenancy.

50.—(1) Subsection (2) applies unless the multiple tenant concerned benefits, by virtue of the preceding Chapters of this Part, from the protection of the Part 4 tenancy on its coming into existence.

(2) A multiple tenant who was in occupation of a dwelling immediately before the coming into existence of a Part 4 tenancy in respect of it shall, on his or her having been in occupation of the dwelling for a continuous period of 6 months (and that tenancy still subsists), benefit from the protection of that tenancy; accordingly the rights, restrictions and obligations under this Part shall, on and from the expiry of that period of 6 months, apply in relation to that multiple tenant as they apply in relation to the multiple tenant whose continuous occupation gave rise to the Part 4 tenancy's existence.

(3) Any person who the landlord accepts as a tenant of a dwelling on, or subsequent to, a Part 4 tenancy coming into existence in respect of it, shall, on his or her having been in occupation of the dwelling for a continuous period of 6 months (and that tenancy still subsists), benefit from the protection of that tenancy; accordingly, the rights, restrictions and obligations under this Part shall, on and from the expiry of that period of 6 months, apply in relation to that person as they apply in relation to the multiple tenant whose continuous occupation gave rise to the Part 4 tenancy's existence.

http://revisedacts.lawreform.ie/eli/2004/act/27/revised/en/html#SEC53