Painsmith Landlord and Tenant Blog

A practitioners landlord and tenant law blog from PainSmith Solicitors

OFT v Foxtons- The Final Order

The final sealed order in the OFT v Foxtons case has been made available on the OFT website. A copy can be found here. This order gives effect to the judgement of the High Court and is now the final word on the matter as Foxtons have withdrawn their appeal.
There are some interesting points to note:

  1. Nothing in the order prevents Foxtons from defending claims against them based on monies already paid under clauses that have now been found to be unfair;
  2. Foxtons are entitled to keep using the original renewal commission clauses in full management agreements;
  3. The wording of the offending clauses used by Foxtons is quite extreme in terms of their ability to charge commission on a long-term basis even where the tenant has been changed. The new terms (in the last Schedule) are much less severe
  4. The approved terms are still charging a renewal commission even though Foxtons has no involvement in the negotiation of a renewal but it is limited to 2 years after the initial tenancy and is clearly stated at the start of the terms of business
  5. Fxotns have removed their ability to take a fee where the landlord has sold the property to another landlords with the tenant in place and where the landlord has sold the property to the tenant

The OFT has made clear in its press releases that it intends to use this decision to put pressure on other agents. How far this will go is unclear and whether the OFT will seek to impose a limitation on other agents as to how long they can continue to collect a renewal commission for.

Unfortunately this will probably lead to another raft of ill-informed letters from landlords stating that the renewal fees they have been charged are unfair. However, agents should consider how they wish to move forward and take advice as to their fee structures to avoid a visit from the OFT.

Filed under: England & Wales, Northern Ireland, Scotland, , , ,

12 Responses

  1. […] Thanks to the Painsmith blog. Original article here […]

  2. […] terms and conditions wich may be of value to some of the forums users and contributors. Lawdoctor OFT v Foxtons- The Final Order The final sealed order in the OFT v Foxtons case has been made available on the OFT website. A […]

  3. […] as always is in the detail. I would advise reading this link (in particular the note numbered 4): OFT v Foxtons- The Final Order Painsmith Landlord and Tenant Blog What you want is for someone on here to tell you that this term is unenforceable. Unfortunately, […]

  4. […] increasingly unhappy with renewal commission clauses that create an indefinite liability. Foxtons settled the case against them by changing their terms of business to limit the time during which they could seek renewal […]

  5. Gen says:

    Hi there,

    I’ve been looking through the Order and cannot find reference to the two year limit you quote in 4. above. Can you help?

    Many Thanks.

  6. PainSmith says:

    Schedule 4, clause 1.2.3

  7. Gen says:

    Many Thanks!

    I’m not sure that this clause is widely known. Foxtons have told me that I am liable to pay an annual fee for as long as the same tenants are in the property.

  8. PainSmith says:

    Have you signed the latest version of Foxtons terms of business. If it is an older version then the clause will not apply to you. They are also able to charge a fee where they are carrying out a service such a rent collection or management.

  9. Gen says:

    Thanks again. My terms of business are older than this order and don’t have the clause. Is there any way of updating the terms given this order or am I stuck with paying them inperpetuity?

  10. Gen says:

    P.S. I signed their terms and conditions in July 2009 (i.e. after the judgement but before the outcome of the appeal), I’m not sure if this makes any difference.

  11. PainSmith says:

    Well, it is likely that the term they are relying on is unfair depending on the precise nature of the business relationship between you and Foxtons.

  12. […] Thanks to the Painsmith blog. Original article here […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 66 other followers

Have you tried the PainSmith toolbar?

Useful links and access to the PainSmith blog in a convenient toolbar within your web browser. Available from: painsmithlettingshelper.ourtoolbar.com/
%d bloggers like this: