Dodgy RE Agent not passing on full rent?

Hi guys,

I've just rented out my apartment for $310 p/w. Trouble is, I'm a little suspicious about the agent who's helping me lease it out is not passing on the full rent to me.

He initially told me that he's got a tenant who wants it at $300 a week and tried to rush me into agreeing to the lease, saying that rental conditions are not as good as it used to be in that area (I was actually hoping to get $320- $330 p/w and also my current tenants are paying $330).

He also said that if I wanted to let it out at $320 - $330 p/w that he would be able to do it but I'll have to wait at least 3-4 weeks. So he basically said that it'll work out the same in the end and I might as well not wait and sign the lease now.

However I was very reluctant to agree to $300 so I said, I'll take my chances and wait a couple more weeks. On hearing this, he then said that he can probably make it $310 p/w and that he'll 'work his magic' to get the tenant to agree.

So in the end I agreed to it but I just feel that there was something fishy about what he told me. How on earth can he just suddenly change it from $300 to $310, particularly after telling me that the tenant had already paid the bond?

Is it possible that the agent somehow signed up a tenant for $330 but he is only passing on $310 to me and pocketing the $20? Because this would explain why he initially started at $300 and then went up to $310?

Trouble is, I have no way to prove this, what do you guys think? Is it common practice for agents to not pass on the full rent that the tenant pays?
 
Ooowhh...don't think pasing on part of the rent paid is allowed...except for the deduction of their commission that is....

Sounds dodgy to me too....I would be asking for a copy of the signed tenancy agreement and kep a close eye on the RE....not much else you can do except ask the tenant directly...which I would go ahead and do if I was really suspicious.

I'm glad we have full control by self managing...;)
 
s it common practice for agents to not pass on the full rent that the tenant pays?

NO, it is not common practice. That would be fraud. :eek:

The agent is probably playing the same game with the prospective tenant. He's just getting you down & the tenant up in price.

Just request a copy of the signed lease when they sign up.
 
Get the pm to send you a copy of the signed lease. It will state what the rent is..

Similar thing happened to me.. PM let my apartment out with a servicing/cleaning fee on top of the rent I was receiving. It wasn't till got a copy of the lease did I see how much he was charging the tenant :eek: but it was only a short term let. I won't let that happen again..
 
What about contacting your tenant just to confirm the rent they're paying?

Yeah I would if I had his number. Hmmm, just need a way to get his contacts without the agent knowing :)

The agent is going to give me a copy of the tenancy agreement, but still, he could dummy one up and give me a 'fake' agreement couldn't he? I know that would be highly illegal, but still whose going to find him out?
 
NO, it is not common practice. That would be fraud. :eek:

The agent is probably playing the same game with the prospective tenant. He's just getting you down & the tenant up in price.

Just request a copy of the signed lease when they sign up.

Yeah the agent just called me and said he'll send me a copy of the lease. You don't suppose he may give me a 'modified' version?
 
I'd give the RTA a call. They're the best bet for letting you know what your rights are as a landlord.. I'm not sure if they receive a copy of the lease when the bond is lodged? If not, they may be able to request a copy..
 
Yeah the agent just called me and said he'll send me a copy of the lease. You don't suppose he may give me a 'modified' version?

Look, I can't speak for your agent BUT I think it highly unlikely. The other thing that strikes me is that you are going to be trusting this PM to collect your rent, do inspections etc etc - so you need to have a relationship based on trust or it is not going to work.
 
You should have already been given a copy of the lease. It's easy to get in touch with the tennant - Just post a letter, you know where he lives:)
Bushy
 
Yeah the agent just called me and said he'll send me a copy of the lease. You don't suppose he may give me a 'modified' version?

He'd be a very dumb RE if he did as you are suspicious already...you could drop a note in the tenants letterbox asking them to call you please just to verify something maybe...only a suggestion as to how to find out.

The other thing is that he is totally telling the truth and you have nothing to worry about.

I'm hearing Elvis starting up now....

♪♫ "...we can't go on togetherrrr...with suspicious minds..."♪♫
 
Look, I can't speak for your agent BUT I think it highly unlikely. The other thing that strikes me is that you are going to be trusting this PM to collect your rent, do inspections etc etc - so you need to have a relationship based on trust or it is not going to work.

Yes you are right I need to trust him to do the right thing, but I just can't help wonder why a tenant will:
a) Already have paid the bond
b) Be willing to move in asap (Wednesday which is 2 days from now)

but not have worked out how much he is willing to pay in rent???

All I know is that when I used to rent a place, I made 100% sure first and foremost exactly how much rent I am up for paying before I pay the bond.
Now if I were to go along with what the agent has told me, it would seem the tenant has paid a bond, but still negotiating on the rent? That's why I'm a little suspect, not saying that I don't trust the agent, but just what he told me to be a little odd.
 
My gut feeling is that he is renting the place to a relative or a mate and wants to help them get the place cheaper rather than taking the risk to his business and license for measly $20/week difference.
 
The convo went like this:
REA to Prospective tenant: Mate, mate, I think I can get you the place for $300pw mate. Pay a bond and I'll confirm it with the owner.
Prospective tenant pays 4 x $300.
REA to Prospective tenant: I'll get back to you once its all confirmed.
REA calls you.
REA to Prospective tenant: Mate, mate I've got good news and bad news. The good news is that you have the OK to rent the place mate. Now the bad news is, that it is going to cost you an extra $10 but mate, mate the market will pay $330 - you're getting a baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaragin mate.:D
 
The convo went like this:
REA to Prospective tenant: Mate, mate, I think I can get you the place for $300pw mate. Pay a bond and I'll confirm it with the owner.
Prospective tenant pays 4 x $300.
REA to Prospective tenant: I'll get back to you once its all confirmed.
REA calls you.
REA to Prospective tenant: Mate, mate I've got good news and bad news. The good news is that you have the OK to rent the place mate. Now the bad news is, that it is going to cost you an extra $10 but mate, mate the market will pay $330 - you're getting a baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaragin mate.:D

Hehe, spoken like a pro :)
 
The convo went like this:
REA to Prospective tenant: Mate, mate, I think I can get you the place for $300pw mate. Pay a bond and I'll confirm it with the owner.
Prospective tenant pays 4 x $300.
REA to Prospective tenant: I'll get back to you once its all confirmed.
REA calls you.
REA to Prospective tenant: Mate, mate I've got good news and bad news. The good news is that you have the OK to rent the place mate. Now the bad news is, that it is going to cost you an extra $10 but mate, mate the market will pay $330 - you're getting a baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaragin mate.:D

That's probably true, but it also shows that the agent is not working for the landlord.:mad:
 
That's probably true, but it also shows that the agent is not working for the landlord.:mad:

And this is news to you? ;)

It is the same really with selling agents, selling property. They need to get purchaser up in price and vendor lower - so they can meet - otherwise no commission for the agent. So are they working for the vendor - yes, but not very well. Are they working for the purchaser - not really, but yes a little bit. Who are they ultimately working for - themselves.
 
Look, I can't speak for your agent BUT I think it highly unlikely. The other thing that strikes me is that you are going to be trusting this PM to collect your rent, do inspections etc etc - so you need to have a relationship based on trust or it is not going to work.
I have no idea why you'd do business with somebody about whom it would enter your head to think "he could dummy one up and give me a 'fake' agreement couldn't he?" If you think this is even a remote possibility, it's time to get a new PM.

If the agent's done nothing to make you distrust him, and you're just this suspicious of everybody, then I don't think you're going to enjoy owning investment properties. Even if you self-manage, you'd worry about what the tenants were doing, if this is your nature.

If it's not in your nature to be so cynical, but this agent has led you to distrust him/her, then a new PM may help.
 
Top