We know that the industry has its rogues – fortunately, very much the exception rather than the rule.
However, the story of Cornwall agent Tim Glasson is a particularly disturbing one.
Glasson, as Eye reported last week, was jailed for 21 months after pleading guilty to ten counts of fraud at Truro Crown Court.
He held on to rental money and kept tenants’ deposit money.
It also turns out that he was the “tenant from hell”, leaving his landlords with a repair bill of £800. Not only that, but he ran up rent arrears of £7,000 and after he was evicted he left a pile of keys and case notes on the drive.
As the law stands, there is nothing whatever to stop Glasson setting up once more as either an estate agent or a letting agent on his release from jail.
It is possible that the National Trading Standards Estate Agency Team at Powys Council might ban him from being an estate agent. If they are anything like their predecessors, the OFT, this process takes months if not years.
But because letting agents are not, in the eyes of the law, estate agents, even if Powys did this, it would not be able to ban him from letting agency work.
Glasson could, of course, be banned as a director. That still would not stop him working in lettings if he wished to.
How does the public begin to be protected?
Politicians seem singularly clueless on this issue, constantly wanting to over-legislate in some areas and under-legislate in others (although an honourable exception is Baroness Hayter who fought hard, but unsuccessfully, to have letting agents regulated).
Eye can only suggest that in the coming months, as candidates vie for votes, agents mention this shocking loophole.
We also very much hope that Kevin Hollinrake of Hunters – who seems likely to become a Tory MP next year – embarks on a mission.
Here is how the local paper in Cornwall reported Glasson’s alleged misdemeanours as a tenant.
Comments (3)
Maybe it says a lot about our industry that this piece has only received two responses?
Until the Government licences agents, previous incarnations of which have refused on advice of the OFT and consumer groups on the basis it would detrimental to the public (yes, really), it won't change.
If agents have to be in a redress scheme, why shouldn't they be licenced when they are responsible for handling people's most valuable asset?
As for ARLA/Nfopp, as you don't have to be in a professional body it's hard to see what difference that would make. The best they can do is turf them out but it won't stop them trading.
They have been pushing for licencing for years but are seen as just doing it for self preservation ie anti competition.
Well done, Eye for bringing this up. Shouldn't ARLA/Nfopp be doing a bit more ?