How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Jo C. Your Own Question
Jo C.
Jo C., Barrister
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 71050
Experience:  Over 5 years in practice
Type Your Law Question Here...
Jo C. is online now

Rented our property out through a lettings agent . When they

Customer Question

Rented our property out through a lettings agent . When they found a tennant we refused because they were young and were claiming social . We were asked by agents if they came up with a suitable guarantor would we accept the tennant then . A short period after they said the guarantor checked out ok , who was the mother of one of the tennants , so we decided it was safe to allow the tenancy to go ahead . The tennants missed the second month and we were always trying to catch up for over two years of lies and excuses and the rental arrears nearing £5000 we eventually got the tennants out . We carried out a credit check on the guarantor and found that prior to becomeing guarantor ,she had been issued a CCJ againt her , and it was still live , this was inforce approx one year before becomeing guarantor . The letting agent never discoverd this and we later discovered they subed the check out to another company . The tennants and guarantor cant be located and have appered to have vanished from all addresses given . Our intention is to claim against the lettings agent for allowing this guarantor . They said the other credit check agent said it was ok , and nothing to do with them, but i believe my contract was with them . Also during the tennancy we said NO pets the tennants had 2 large dogs unknown to us , these animals have done in excess of £ 2000 worth of damage along with the damage caused by the tennants . The lettings agent said they would carry out 6 monthly checks verbally , but there contract says they will carry out periodic checks , in over 2 years they never visited the house , but they said they tried , but no access was allowed to them to view the property . We were never in formed by the agents that they couldnt view the house internally. We also feel that we should claim for this damage as well , the repairs were mainly carried out by myself so the repairs cost of approx £2000 were mainly for materials . Mr C M Almond .
Submitted: 2 years ago.
Category: Law
Expert:  Jo C. replied 2 years ago.
Thank you for your question. My name is ***** ***** I will try to help with this.
What would you like to know about this please?
Customer: replied 2 years ago.

I would like to know if you think i have a case against the letting agents for not properly acting for us. By this i mean not fully investigating the guarantor and finding out she had ccjs and also for not visiting the property evry 6 months to check it out. If they did do the checks, they would have found out the tenants had dogs which was stipulated in the contract NO DOGS!

I want to claim for loss of rent and for damages within the householdI

Expert:  Jo C. replied 2 years ago.
Did they represent that they did credit checks?
Customer: replied 2 years ago.

Yes they said that credit check was carried out , but they never told us that they used a third party to do this . they came up with a credit score from this company of 528 , moderate risk and accept . this firm was Legal for landlords .

Expert:  Jo C. replied 2 years ago.
528 is actually a fairly low credit score.

It does depend what is in your contract but overall it does sound as though a credit score of 528 and a recent CCJ which was not satisfied does give rise to an inference that this wasn't an eligible guarantor.

If you cannot find a breach of an overt term in the contract then you could fall back upon the general law of contract that it is implied by the law that any contract will be performed with reasonable care and skill.

A claim on that basis would give rise to direct and consequential losses although this sounds like a fairly direct loss as your whole complaint is that the guarantor is not a solvent person.

In terms of the damage, that is harder. They did not cause the damage. They just failed to detect it. You would have to show that the failure to detect allowed the damage to be caused or worsened which is hard to do. Another option though is to claim on the basis that their negligence landed you with a guarantor that cannot be sued and so on that basis they are liable for the damge.

Can I clarify anything for you?