Re: Interesting question
- From: Mogga <di@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 16:30:38 +0100
On 10 Apr 2007 08:01:00 -0700, "Martyn Cartwright"
<martyncartwright@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Contract law, wonderful thing it is. "My word is my bond" there has to
be a firm and clear agreement between two parties for there to be
contract. Estate agents are as honest as that Fools and Horses bloke
on TV, this agent has to prove that a contract is made, from what you
say it was vague and unagreed, they will not pursue this unless they
want to look like the silly donkeys they are, plus the adverse
publicity would not be good for them either.
Martyn Cartwright
Don't they hoist themselves with their own petard with so many fees?
The contract they want is dependent on so many silly fees that there's
probably hidden in there a pre-contract-contractual-obligation fee.
But as no fees have been paid it would seem to me tough on them.
I know a case recently where new builds were shown to people and then
the agent's representative took the potential tenants to another
cheaper property where the agency fees weren't needed as it wasn't
officially on their books.
This new build property originally shown was always a no-no once they
found out about a silly £100+ a month charge for grounds maintenance
which would net the developer about 9k a month for mowing about 100
square yards of grass.
.
- References:
- Interesting question
- From: nullified
- Re: Interesting question
- From: MrCheerful
- Re: Interesting question
- From: Martyn Cartwright
- Interesting question
- Prev by Date: Re: Interesting question
- Next by Date: Re: Interesting question
- Previous by thread: Re: Interesting question
- Next by thread: Re: Interesting question
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading