Agent with similar name to one expelled by TPO condemned on Shelter website

A letting agent has been condemned in a tenant’s story that has been posted up on the Shelter website.

The agent has a very similar name to one that was expelled from TPO a few years ago, which is no longer in business. The agent now in business is registered with TPO but chooses not to display the logo on its site. TPO warned that it could face a fine of up to £5,000.

The agent vehemently denies that it has done anything wrong.

The Shelter story is about Emily, an English teacher, who took a firm called Global Realty to court over a £700 holding deposit paid by herself and her partner.

Subsequently, the couple were told that the landlord considered their income too low. The agent told them that they would secure the property if they paid six months’ rent in advance – £11,000.

The pair pulled out of the deal, as they could not afford that sum, and asked for their £700 back.

By that point, they had looked up Global Realty online and found it had been expelled from The Property Ombudsman scheme.

Emily then took Global Realty to court to get the £700 back. She says a director of the firm, Mrs Rivka – or Ricky – Galer, tried to counter-sue her for £2,616 for loss of earnings and writing negative reviews online about Global Realty.

However, Emily took the firm to the small claims court and won.

She says that Ricky Galer’s defence was that the £700 fee was non-refundable, and that she should have sued GH Global Realty Limited, not Global Realty.

The judge viewed this as a technicality and ruled against both names, says Emily.

The Shelter story concludes by saying that GH Global Realty Limited was dissolved on April 14 this year.

It ends: “Rivka Galer continues to trade from two premises in London (St John’s Wood and Finchley Road) with the same sign ‘Global Realty’, the same website. Effectively she has changed nothing but is still able to evade court action.

“There are no repercussions for estate agents like Global Realty that use multiple corporate identities to ignore county court judgments whilst continuing to trade.

“We must change the law!”

GH Global Realty was expelled by TPO because it had not paid a £1,600 fine levied in a complex case over a tenancy deposit.

Yesterday afternoon, we spoke to Nathan Galer at one of Global Realty’s two London offices.

He claimed that in the case concerning Emily and her partner, the couple had not given the right information at the outset.

They had been told in writing that their holding deposit was non-refundable.

Regarding the TPO expulsion, he said that the tenancy had ended early because, while the tenants had signed for a year, they only had six-month visas to be in the UK.

He also confirmed that GH Global Realty no longer traded and had been dissolved.

Global Realty is registered with TPO, but does not display the logo or give information about redress on its website. Galer said that he did not believe this to be a requirement.

Yesterday afternoon, a spokesperson for TPO confirmed: “GH Global Realty Ltd was expelled from voluntary membership in 2009 for breaching the scheme’s Lettings Code of Practice and terms of membership.

“A different company, trading under a different legal entity, by the name of Global Realty St John’s Wood Ltd registered with TPO some five years later, in June 2014.

“Every sales and letting agent is required to display their redress membership.

“Those failing to do so will be investigated by TPO and Trading Standards if appropriate, who have the powers to issue fines of up £5,000.”

The story is on the Shelter website here

x

Email the story to a friend!



3 Comments

  1. MF

    That’s a hefty holding deposit and how can it be fair to keep it if they fail referencing? In the same situation, my firm refunds the holding deposit, less £80 per person toward referencing/admin charges.

    Report
  2. PRman

    Global Realty is not a member of TPO but is registered with it to comply with minimum standards (check the TPO website for yourself). It is not allowed to display the normal TPO logo. If Eye and Shelter cannot recognise the difference, how are consumers supposed to understand it. Shelter is wrong to say the law requires lettings agents to be members of TPO and, come to that, sales agents are not either. It’s absolute madness to have such confusion legally imposed on both redress scheme operators and the public. TPO is not allowed to reject registration requests, even from expelled lettings members, as it cannot ban people from trading. It has no regulatory function.

    Report
  3. smile please

    It is a shame really.

    Shelter raise a valid concern here that should be looked at from a number of angles but because of their quite frankly mad stance on everything rental related it will not be heard.

    Maybe they should revisit the story of the boy who cried wolf …..

    Report
X

You must be logged in to report this comment!

Comments are closed.

Thank you for signing up to our newsletter, we have sent you an email asking you to confirm your subscription. Additionally if you would like to create a free EYE account which allows you to comment on news stories and manage your email subscriptions please enter a password below.